Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Does this apply even to rising 8th graders applying in AY25-26? Will be hard to them to choose from unclear options

I suspect few if any things will actually change for the 2026-2027 school year (other than internal prep stuff); 2027-2028 is more likely.

But no one really knows at this point. We'll see what gets shared at the board meeting on Tuesday, and if you have questions or thoughts about it you might want to share them with board members now in hopes they will bring them up during that part of the agenda.

MCPS knows and they already said they would share the new programs in time for applications in January 2026 for the 2026-27 school year. I can understand how it’s confusing given the amount of information coming out about so many topics at once, but they are clearly communicating

This has not been communicated, let alone clearly. HS applications are in the fall. January is already course selection. Your timeline makes no sense and you keep posting with such confidence.

Not the OP, but January is when the implementation begins per CO. Course selection does not impact special programs because kids regular for the home school until they are accepted at a special program which does not occur until Febrary/March timeframe.

Last year the application for HS special programs opened on October 7th and closed on November 1st. Previews of the programs began before the app opened, in September. How can all of that happen if they don't know what the new programs will be until January?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Does this apply even to rising 8th graders applying in AY25-26? Will be hard to them to choose from unclear options

I suspect few if any things will actually change for the 2026-2027 school year (other than internal prep stuff); 2027-2028 is more likely.

But no one really knows at this point. We'll see what gets shared at the board meeting on Tuesday, and if you have questions or thoughts about it you might want to share them with board members now in hopes they will bring them up during that part of the agenda.

MCPS knows and they already said they would share the new programs in time for applications in January 2026 for the 2026-27 school year. I can understand how it’s confusing given the amount of information coming out about so many topics at once, but they are clearly communicating

This has not been communicated, let alone clearly. HS applications are in the fall. January is already course selection. Your timeline makes no sense and you keep posting with such confidence.

Not the OP, but January is when the implementation begins per CO. Course selection does not impact special programs because kids regular for the home school until they are accepted at a special program which does not occur until Febrary/March timeframe.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Does this apply even to rising 8th graders applying in AY25-26? Will be hard to them to choose from unclear options

I suspect few if any things will actually change for the 2026-2027 school year (other than internal prep stuff); 2027-2028 is more likely.

But no one really knows at this point. We'll see what gets shared at the board meeting on Tuesday, and if you have questions or thoughts about it you might want to share them with board members now in hopes they will bring them up during that part of the agenda.

MCPS knows and they already said they would share the new programs in time for applications in January 2026 for the 2026-27 school year. I can understand how it’s confusing given the amount of information coming out about so many topics at once, but they are clearly communicating

This has not been communicated, let alone clearly. HS applications are in the fall. January is already course selection. Your timeline makes no sense and you keep posting with such confidence.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Will it be finalized soon or just proposed and open for comment?

Look, the year is gonna start with "21" before this gets done.

More likely they rush it into place to let people start applying for programs that aren't fully formed yet.

+1

That is the MCPS way!

Also does this mean there won’t be the county-wide programs anymore?

This could be the end of county-wide programs, which is why the Richard Montgomery IB community is losing their marbles over the Program Review and Boundary Study.

This is really sad. Why does MCPS always want to destroy the only good things they have?

You do realize there are plenty of parents and students on MCPS who want to see exactly this. They are tired of a select few schools being talked about as capable and provided resources. And instead want a more equitable distribution of resources and the opportunity for more kids to attend programs.

If a regional model could do this well that would be one thing. But MCPS can't even get local programming right, let alone a suite of reigonal offerings. I also think the cost of bussing is going to take away resources from what is needed in schools. This is a bad idea.

There is already a bunch of disparate regional offerings and problems in local programming. This is shining a light on what people have been saying about this and requiring the county to actually do something. The folks arguing against this seem to be the same one arguing that their neighborhood shouldn’t be impacted in the boundary study. Often for no other reason besides they don’t like it.

No it’s teachers saying don’t mess with stability. It’s fine to add programs but if you take strong programs away, you will lose good staff to any place that has more certainty. Staff is saying be careful.

The county and school system have changed so much in the last few decades. Unfortunately, change is sometimes necessary. And I get it, my kid benefits from a language immersion program (not HS) and I do worry these HS program changes could foretell changes at the ES and MS levels. I would be disappointed about it and the staff would have to be reallocated, which would be hard for them.

There would be blowback over that. I think it’s very different to change programming to widen the scope, versus cut a program from existence. Obviously it could happen but MCPS has some of the oldest and most successful immersion programming in the country.

Anonymous wrote:This is huge news that I think has been lost in the boundary change uproar. I hope they do expand access to special GT programs like stem magnets. Look how quickly Wheaton became a draw once it had the engineering magnet! Kennedy is a tough one because one regional IB program could not help that school. No MCPS teacher wants to be there, no parent wants their kid there. They need to do more to put a lot of great programs all around the county so that all the schools are desirable- for teachers and parents.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Will it be finalized soon or just proposed and open for comment?

Look, the year is gonna start with "21" before this gets done.

More likely they rush it into place to let people start applying for programs that aren't fully formed yet.

+1

That is the MCPS way!

Also does this mean there won’t be the county-wide programs anymore?

This could be the end of county-wide programs, which is why the Richard Montgomery IB community is losing their marbles over the Program Review and Boundary Study.

This is really sad. Why does MCPS always want to destroy the only good things they have?

You do realize there are plenty of parents and students on MCPS who want to see exactly this. They are tired of a select few schools being talked about as capable and provided resources. And instead want a more equitable distribution of resources and the opportunity for more kids to attend programs.

If a regional model could do this well that would be one thing. But MCPS can't even get local programming right, let alone a suite of reigonal offerings. I also think the cost of bussing is going to take away resources from what is needed in schools. This is a bad idea.

There is already a bunch of disparate regional offerings and problems in local programming. This is shining a light on what people have been saying about this and requiring the county to actually do something. The folks arguing against this seem to be the same one arguing that their neighborhood shouldn’t be impacted in the boundary study. Often for no other reason besides they don’t like it.

No it’s teachers saying don’t mess with stability. It’s fine to add programs but if you take strong programs away, you will lose good staff to any place that has more certainty. Staff is saying be careful.

The county and school system have changed so much in the last few decades. Unfortunately, change is sometimes necessary. And I get it, my kid benefits from a language immersion program (not HS) and I do worry these HS program changes could foretell changes at the ES and MS levels. I would be disappointed about it and the staff would have to be reallocated, which would be hard for them.

There would be blowback over that. I think it’s very different to change programming to widen the scope, versus cut a program from existence. Obviously it could happen but MCPS has some of the oldest and most successful immersion programming in the country.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Will it be finalized soon or just proposed and open for comment?

Look, the year is gonna start with "21" before this gets done.

More likely they rush it into place to let people start applying for programs that aren't fully formed yet.

+1

That is the MCPS way!

Also does this mean there won’t be the county-wide programs anymore?

This could be the end of county-wide programs, which is why the Richard Montgomery IB community is losing their marbles over the Program Review and Boundary Study.

This is really sad. Why does MCPS always want to destroy the only good things they have?

You do realize there are plenty of parents and students on MCPS who want to see exactly this. They are tired of a select few schools being talked about as capable and provided resources. And instead want a more equitable distribution of resources and the opportunity for more kids to attend programs.

If a regional model could do this well that would be one thing. But MCPS can't even get local programming right, let alone a suite of reigonal offerings. I also think the cost of bussing is going to take away resources from what is needed in schools. This is a bad idea.

There is already a bunch of disparate regional offerings and problems in local programming. This is shining a light on what people have been saying about this and requiring the county to actually do something. The folks arguing against this seem to be the same one arguing that their neighborhood shouldn’t be impacted in the boundary study. Often for no other reason besides they don’t like it.

No it’s teachers saying don’t mess with stability. It’s fine to add programs but if you take strong programs away, you will lose good staff to any place that has more certainty. Staff is saying be careful.

The county and school system have changed so much in the last few decades. Unfortunately, change is sometimes necessary. And I get it, my kid benefits from a language immersion program (not HS) and I do worry these HS program changes could foretell changes at the ES and MS levels. I would be disappointed about it and the staff would have to be reallocated, which would be hard for them.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Will it be finalized soon or just proposed and open for comment?

Look, the year is gonna start with "21" before this gets done.

More likely they rush it into place to let people start applying for programs that aren't fully formed yet.

+1

That is the MCPS way!

Also does this mean there won’t be the county-wide programs anymore?

This could be the end of county-wide programs, which is why the Richard Montgomery IB community is losing their marbles over the Program Review and Boundary Study.

This is really sad. Why does MCPS always want to destroy the only good things they have?

You do realize there are plenty of parents and students on MCPS who want to see exactly this. They are tired of a select few schools being talked about as capable and provided resources. And instead want a more equitable distribution of resources and the opportunity for more kids to attend programs.

If a regional model could do this well that would be one thing. But MCPS can't even get local programming right, let alone a suite of reigonal offerings. I also think the cost of bussing is going to take away resources from what is needed in schools. This is a bad idea.

There is already a bunch of disparate regional offerings and problems in local programming. This is shining a light on what people have been saying about this and requiring the county to actually do something. The folks arguing against this seem to be the same one arguing that their neighborhood shouldn’t be impacted in the boundary study. Often for no other reason besides they don’t like it.

No it’s teachers saying don’t mess with stability. It’s fine to add programs but if you take strong programs away, you will lose good staff to any place that has more certainty. Staff is saying be careful.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Will it be finalized soon or just proposed and open for comment?

Look, the year is gonna start with "21" before this gets done.

More likely they rush it into place to let people start applying for programs that aren't fully formed yet.

+1

That is the MCPS way!

Also does this mean there won’t be the county-wide programs anymore?

This could be the end of county-wide programs, which is why the Richard Montgomery IB community is losing their marbles over the Program Review and Boundary Study.

This is really sad. Why does MCPS always want to destroy the only good things they have?

You do realize there are plenty of parents and students on MCPS who want to see exactly this. They are tired of a select few schools being talked about as capable and provided resources. And instead want a more equitable distribution of resources and the opportunity for more kids to attend programs.

If a regional model could do this well that would be one thing. But MCPS can't even get local programming right, let alone a suite of reigonal offerings. I also think the cost of bussing is going to take away resources from what is needed in schools. This is a bad idea.

There is already a bunch of disparate regional offerings and problems in local programming. This is shining a light on what people have been saying about this and requiring the county to actually do something. The folks arguing against this seem to be the same one arguing that their neighborhood shouldn’t be impacted in the boundary study. Often for no other reason besides they don’t like it.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Does this apply even to rising 8th graders applying in AY25-26? Will be hard to them to choose from unclear options

I suspect few if any things will actually change for the 2026-2027 school year (other than internal prep stuff); 2027-2028 is more likely.

But no one really knows at this point. We'll see what gets shared at the board meeting on Tuesday, and if you have questions or thoughts about it you might want to share them with board members now in hopes they will bring them up during that part of the agenda.

MCPS knows and they already said they would share the new programs in time for applications in January 2026 for the 2026-27 school year. I can understand how it’s confusing given the amount of information coming out about so many topics at once, but they are clearly communicating

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What about Poolesville and Blair? They are regional. They will be gone too?

There are going to be more regions so I imagine they will have them, but kids from fewer schools will be able to apply. Just the ones in the same region as Poolesville and Blair. Quality will go down because they won’t have half the county each to choose from.

Same with RMIB — I will bet it will exist but only in its own region. That will really affect quality — it will have many, many fewer students to choose from.

Its a shame for the county to lose their most successful well known programs.

So for perspective my children are still younger.

Isn’t it a good thing though to expand access to these programs by opening more seats and making them more geographically accessible? Aren’t there more qualified applicants than there are spaces?

Yeah, seriously. If RMIB now takes the top 1% of kids in the county and then it switches to be a set of regional programs that cover the top 5 or 6% of kids in the county, is it really that big a deal?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Will it be finalized soon or just proposed and open for comment?

Look, the year is gonna start with "21" before this gets done.

More likely they rush it into place to let people start applying for programs that aren't fully formed yet.

+1

That is the MCPS way!

Also does this mean there won’t be the county-wide programs anymore?

This could be the end of county-wide programs, which is why the Richard Montgomery IB community is losing their marbles over the Program Review and Boundary Study.

This is really sad. Why does MCPS always want to destroy the only good things they have?

You do realize there are plenty of parents and students on MCPS who want to see exactly this. They are tired of a select few schools being talked about as capable and provided resources. And instead want a more equitable distribution of resources and the opportunity for more kids to attend programs.

If a regional model could do this well that would be one thing. But MCPS can't even get local programming right, let alone a suite of reigonal offerings. I also think the cost of bussing is going to take away resources from what is needed in schools. This is a bad idea.