Anonymous
11/03/2025 12:38
Subject: Re:Why are we having so many regional magnets when the Watkins Mills and Seneca Valley programs were failures?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:OP, this is the question MCPS refuses to answer. If they couldn't successfully scale the RMIB program regionally, it is implausible they'd be able to accomplish what they're claiming to do with their regional program proposal, which strives to do what the Regional IB program tried to do on steroids.
Taylor explained his take on this at one of the first regional program meetings. He thinks that keeping RMIB available as a countywide program prevented the regional programs from succeeding, because the highest flyers were still intent on going there and not interested in the regions.
But that's not true. Take Kennedy, for example. Most of the kids who attended the Kennedy IB program were zoned for Kennedy. Look at RMIB: Most of the kids in that program were from RM cluster and the W schools. The countywide was not pulling kids who otherwise would've attended the Kennedy Regional IB.
So as usual, Taylor is lying.
It looks like the Watkins Mill regional numbers support his theory, though. Many more students from Clarksburg, Damascus, Northwest, and Quince Orchard chose RMIB over WMIB.
Ok, but this program was scaled to Kennedy, Watkins Mill, Springbrook and Seneca Valley.
That theory being true for one cluster (WM), does not explain why MCPS did not replicate RM's results at Springbrook and Kennedy. And Taylor should not make sweeping statements that make it seem as such.
Seneca Valley is a local IB program, not regional (currently).
Anonymous
11/03/2025 12:26
Subject: Re:Why are we having so many regional magnets when the Watkins Mills and Seneca Valley programs were failures?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:OP, this is the question MCPS refuses to answer. If they couldn't successfully scale the RMIB program regionally, it is implausible they'd be able to accomplish what they're claiming to do with their regional program proposal, which strives to do what the Regional IB program tried to do on steroids.
Taylor explained his take on this at one of the first regional program meetings. He thinks that keeping RMIB available as a countywide program prevented the regional programs from succeeding, because the highest flyers were still intent on going there and not interested in the regions.
But that's not true. Take Kennedy, for example. Most of the kids who attended the Kennedy IB program were zoned for Kennedy. Look at RMIB: Most of the kids in that program were from RM cluster and the W schools. The countywide was not pulling kids who otherwise would've attended the Kennedy Regional IB.
So as usual, Taylor is lying.
It looks like the Watkins Mill regional numbers support his theory, though. Many more students from Clarksburg, Damascus, Northwest, and Quince Orchard chose RMIB over WMIB.
Ok, but this program was scaled to Kennedy, Watkins Mill, Springbrook and Seneca Valley.
That theory being true for one cluster (WM), does not explain why MCPS did not replicate RM's results at Springbrook and Kennedy. And Taylor should not make sweeping statements that make it seem as such.
Anonymous
11/03/2025 12:25
Subject: Why are we having so many regional magnets when the Watkins Mills and Seneca Valley programs were failures?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:The MCPS position is that they were failures because RMIB was still around as a countywide program, and if there are no countywide programs then the regional ones will succeed.
I don't know how much it would change.
Seneca Valley regional IB - new and the biggest unknown.
Paint Branch regional IB - barely any change
Kennedy regional IB - biggest change with WJ being part of the region
Watkins Mill regional IB -- slight change with QO and some boundary changes from Crown
https://go.boarddocs.com/mabe/mcpsmd/Board.nsf/files/DJVQ546789D4/$file/Attachment%20B%20Program%20Analysis%20Data%20Slides%20250724.pdf
RMIB has 475 students. 225 from the same region 4. Almost half of RMIB students come from this region.
110 from RM - region 4
63 from Churchill - region 4
62 from Wootton - region 4
42 Walter Johnson Kennedy region 3.
31 Northwest new SV IB region 6
28 Clarksburg new SVIB region 6 ( IMO, NW and Clarksburg would have the biggest loss here)
19 QO - region 5 Watkins IB regional
17 Damascus region 6 new SV IB
11 Macgruder region 5 Watkins IB regional)
The rest are < 10.
Region 1 BCC IB - no significant population in RMIB from this region. This region is mostly currently served by the current Kennedy region. So not much would change.
BCC
Whitman
Einstein
Blair
Northwood
Region 2
Springbrook IB new region would serve: Sherwood, Blake, Paint Branch.
Springbrook IB regional current enrollment 252 already serves those schools. Nothing would change. RMIB doesn't have any significant population from these schools.
Blake 74
Paint Branch 54
Springbrook 114
Sherwood < 10
Region 3
Kennedy IB regional would serve: Einstein, Woodward, WJ. This one may change due to the Woodward boundary changes.
Current Kennedy IB enrollment 196 total:
Kennedy 86
Einstein 17
WJ 42 from RMIB
Woodward ? -
Region 5
Watkins Mill IB would serve: QO, GHS, Seneca, Crown, Macgruder. This one may change slightly due to Crown.
Current enrollment 163
Current RMIB - 19 for QO
It doesn't appear that a significant portion of Wootton would go to Crown with the new boundary.
GHS 18
WM 111
Rest are < 10
So, out of the 4 current IB programs, I think only Kennedy would see a significant change.
With regards to RMIB, the statistics you are quoting are not in the link you provided.
Moreover, those statistics appear to include not only the set-aside for JWMS but also the kids in-bounds for RM who opted into the IB program in 11th grade. That's not a real metric of where the criteria-based admissions are coming from.
Anonymous
11/03/2025 12:08
Subject: Re:Why are we having so many regional magnets when the Watkins Mills and Seneca Valley programs were failures?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:OP, this is the question MCPS refuses to answer. If they couldn't successfully scale the RMIB program regionally, it is implausible they'd be able to accomplish what they're claiming to do with their regional program proposal, which strives to do what the Regional IB program tried to do on steroids.
Taylor explained his take on this at one of the first regional program meetings. He thinks that keeping RMIB available as a countywide program prevented the regional programs from succeeding, because the highest flyers were still intent on going there and not interested in the regions.
But that's not true. Take Kennedy, for example. Most of the kids who attended the Kennedy IB program were zoned for Kennedy. Look at RMIB: Most of the kids in that program were from RM cluster and the W schools. The countywide was not pulling kids who otherwise would've attended the Kennedy Regional IB.
So as usual, Taylor is lying.
It looks like the Watkins Mill regional numbers support his theory, though. Many more students from Clarksburg, Damascus, Northwest, and Quince Orchard chose RMIB over WMIB.
Anonymous
11/03/2025 12:02
Subject: Re:Why are we having so many regional magnets when the Watkins Mills and Seneca Valley programs were failures?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:OP, this is the question MCPS refuses to answer. If they couldn't successfully scale the RMIB program regionally, it is implausible they'd be able to accomplish what they're claiming to do with their regional program proposal, which strives to do what the Regional IB program tried to do on steroids.
Taylor explained his take on this at one of the first regional program meetings. He thinks that keeping RMIB available as a countywide program prevented the regional programs from succeeding, because the highest flyers were still intent on going there and not interested in the regions.
But that's not true. Take Kennedy, for example. Most of the kids who attended the Kennedy IB program were zoned for Kennedy. Look at RMIB: Most of the kids in that program were from RM cluster and the W schools. The countywide was not pulling kids who otherwise would've attended the Kennedy Regional IB.
So as usual, Taylor is lying.
Anonymous
11/03/2025 11:58
Subject: Re:Why are we having so many regional magnets when the Watkins Mills and Seneca Valley programs were failures?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:OP, this is the question MCPS refuses to answer. If they couldn't successfully scale the RMIB program regionally, it is implausible they'd be able to accomplish what they're claiming to do with their regional program proposal, which strives to do what the Regional IB program tried to do on steroids.
Taylor explained his take on this at one of the first regional program meetings. He thinks that keeping RMIB available as a countywide program prevented the regional programs from succeeding, because the highest flyers were still intent on going there and not interested in the regions.
It won't help the regions that much.
I posted upthread maybe the numbers of what HS the RMIB students come from. Majority are in cluster, then Wootton and Chuchill. All are in region 4.
There is one region (can't remember which) where there is probably going to be no to little change of the students from RMIB.
https://go.boarddocs.com/mabe/mcpsmd/Board.nsf/files/DJVQ56678E2B/$file/Attachment%20D%20SY2025%20Student%20Enrollment%20Countywide%20Programs%20250724.pdf
Anonymous
11/03/2025 11:50
Subject: Re:Why are we having so many regional magnets when the Watkins Mills and Seneca Valley programs were failures?
Anonymous wrote:OP, this is the question MCPS refuses to answer. If they couldn't successfully scale the RMIB program regionally, it is implausible they'd be able to accomplish what they're claiming to do with their regional program proposal, which strives to do what the Regional IB program tried to do on steroids.
Taylor explained his take on this at one of the first regional program meetings. He thinks that keeping RMIB available as a countywide program prevented the regional programs from succeeding, because the highest flyers were still intent on going there and not interested in the regions.
Anonymous
11/03/2025 11:22
Subject: Re:Why are we having so many regional magnets when the Watkins Mills and Seneca Valley programs were failures?
Anonymous wrote:OP, this is the question MCPS refuses to answer. If they couldn't successfully scale the RMIB program regionally, it is implausible they'd be able to accomplish what they're claiming to do with their regional program proposal, which strives to do what the Regional IB program tried to do on steroids.
+1000
What might make more sense is for MCPS to create a trial region for a community that wants to opt-in (not be forced-in like in the proposed regions model), and see how that goes. Then the broader community can see whether or not the model can work, whether it’s a desirable change, what needs improvement.
Anonymous
11/03/2025 11:06
Subject: Re:Why are we having so many regional magnets when the Watkins Mills and Seneca Valley programs were failures?
OP, this is the question MCPS refuses to answer. If they couldn't successfully scale the RMIB program regionally, it is implausible they'd be able to accomplish what they're claiming to do with their regional program proposal, which strives to do what the Regional IB program tried to do on steroids.
Anonymous
11/03/2025 10:57
Subject: Why are we having so many regional magnets when the Watkins Mills and Seneca Valley programs were failures?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:For those of us who are not familiar with these programs, can you.give more details about what makes them failures from your perspective?
Watkins Mills has an IB program. School rating is a 3.5. Farms 81.8%.
Richard Montgomery has an IB program. School rating 8. Farms 39.3%
You see anything here? Having the IB program there did nothing for Watkins Mills.
Now they are proposing more such nonsense.
How on earth is any school supposed to succeed with a FARMS rate of 81.8%?! Geez. I graduated from WM way back, and it's distressing to see what the school and surrounding area have become.
I don't know where that 81.8 percent came from. I checked a couple of places, the first round and second round of effects tables and mdreportcard and all three sources has Watkins Mill's FARMs rate hovering around the 50 percent mark. When I looked a while back I don't think any school in MCPS has a FARMS rate above 80 percent. Some had more than 65ish.
We actually know a couple of families who were happy with Watkins Mill and seems like their kids are doing pretty well. Personally I don't think it's the right fit for our family. But it goes to show that for the most part people are happy with their schools and maybe a slight case of not knowing what they're missing too.
Anonymous
11/03/2025 10:43
Subject: Why are we having so many regional magnets when the Watkins Mills and Seneca Valley programs were failures?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:For those of us who are not familiar with these programs, can you.give more details about what makes them failures from your perspective?
Watkins Mills has an IB program. School rating is a 3.5. Farms 81.8%.
Richard Montgomery has an IB program. School rating 8. Farms 39.3%
You see anything here? Having the IB program there did nothing for Watkins Mills.
Now they are proposing more such nonsense.
How on earth is any school supposed to succeed with a FARMS rate of 81.8%?! Geez. I graduated from WM way back, and it's distressing to see what the school and surrounding area have become.
Anonymous
10/25/2025 17:23
Subject: Why are we having so many regional magnets when the Watkins Mills and Seneca Valley programs were failures?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Many students don't want IB.
This. We are at a non-RM school that offers the IB and my kid much prefers taking AP classes. Zero interest in IB.
Why? What about an IB class makes it less desirable than an AP class?
AP you can focus on the disciplines you are interested in. And if you fail one test at the end (a 2), you did not waste your time on all the other AP courses you took.
IB you have to invest in the whole program and be willing/capable of rigorous work across multiple disciplines. Fail one test at the end and you don’t get the diploma.
The diploma doesn't really matter though, unless you want to go to Oxford or the Sorbonne. You don't get results until July, at which point you've already accepted a college place. You can get college credit for every IB score above a certain threshold, even if you don't pass the entire exam.
I would argue that doing the rigor is more important than the result. Sometimes striving for something matters more than an outcome. AP is all about teaching to the test. IB is about learning to write and interpret data and communicate the results of your research and effort. Which has more practical applications in the real world? I suppose it depends on how your h define success.
Anonymous
10/25/2025 12:10
Subject: Why are we having so many regional magnets when the Watkins Mills and Seneca Valley programs were failures?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Many students don't want IB.
This. We are at a non-RM school that offers the IB and my kid much prefers taking AP classes. Zero interest in IB.
Why? What about an IB class makes it less desirable than an AP class?
AP you can focus on the disciplines you are interested in. And if you fail one test at the end (a 2), you did not waste your time on all the other AP courses you took.
IB you have to invest in the whole program and be willing/capable of rigorous work across multiple disciplines. Fail one test at the end and you don’t get the diploma.
You can get a 2 out of 7 on two tests, and still get the diploma.
But yea, getting the IBDP is tougher than AP. The IBDP is like a college level integrated liberal arts program. It's not really about getting college credit like AP exams but about developing critical thinking skills and deep analysis.
AP exams are easier since many just self study for them and are able to do well.
-signed parent of IBDP student who also took numerous AP exams by self studying.
Anonymous
10/25/2025 06:15
Subject: Why are we having so many regional magnets when the Watkins Mills and Seneca Valley programs were failures?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Many students don't want IB.
This. We are at a non-RM school that offers the IB and my kid much prefers taking AP classes. Zero interest in IB.
Why? What about an IB class makes it less desirable than an AP class?
AP you can focus on the disciplines you are interested in. And if you fail one test at the end (a 2), you did not waste your time on all the other AP courses you took.
IB you have to invest in the whole program and be willing/capable of rigorous work across multiple disciplines. Fail one test at the end and you don’t get the diploma.
Anonymous
10/25/2025 06:11
Subject: Why are we having so many regional magnets when the Watkins Mills and Seneca Valley programs were failures?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:For those of us who are not familiar with these programs, can you.give more details about what makes them failures from your perspective?
Watkins Mills has an IB program. School rating is a 3.5. Farms 81.8%.
Richard Montgomery has an IB program. School rating 8. Farms 39.3%
You see anything here? Having the IB program there did nothing for Watkins Mills.
Now they are proposing more such nonsense.
Do you have the perspective of individual students in the IB program about how they feel about it?
You could post the same stats about Eastern, but few on DCUM consider it a failure.