Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm surprised MCPS would gut TPMS. I thought it was considered one of the golden schools in the system? But the rest of the stuff you described in terms of lack of transparency, disregarding community input, etc. is very much textbook MCPS.

I just didn't think they'd do that to Takoma Park!

The teachers voted to go from teaching 6 classes to 5. They voted to keep class size at current level. Said a few more per class was absolutely not doable.

Translates to one less elective for everyone. And for any special program student, magnet or otherwise, means they only have one. Most of the magnet students were pushed in to taking a language as an elective and so now must choose between an actual elective and language. The majority will choose language. The school openly acknowledges that the number of electives teachers will decrease- the majority of which are music and art teachers. The majority of magnet kids (1/3 of the school) had their “2nd elective” in the arts- many in band/orchestra.

As for the autism program and other programs where kids need enrichments, they will loose those enrichments or have zero electives.


The administration “promises” to review “mitigation strategies” at some point. Fat chance.

That’s normal for most ms.

Most MS are local schools. Who wants a long commute where you don’t get anything more than you’d get locally? Turns out, there are many who don’t.

So only kids whose home school is crappy will choose the magnet. Win for equity.

Locally normed equity! Kids from the “smart schools” with higher test scores will no longer go and many kids already there will not be returning. It will be a shell of a magnet.

Good news. Good neighborhood schools will get their cohort back and stop losing competitions to the cheating all-star magnet teams.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'd like to try and summarize so I can keep this straight in my head.

TPMS currently has an 8 period schedule and teachers voted to move it to a 7 period schedule. This is inline with other MCPS MS but the vote did not engage the community (parents). Teachers also voted not to increase class size.

As an example: if a grade has 100 kids. There used to be 5 periods of English available so there would be 20 kids in a class. Now there are only 4 periods of English available so there would be 25 kids in a class. However, teachers also did not want class size to increase.

So budget will have to be allocated to increase teachers for core classes to keep the class size the same. The budget will come from a decrease in the art and music budget. As there will be less teachers for art and music, there will be less elective periods available and now students will be limited to one elective (language, art, or music)

Did I get all of that correct?

This is all correct. As someone inside the school community, I'd say there are two issues here, the content of the decision and the process of the decision.

The content of the decision is fairly defensible. Teachers were working beyond the contract, and it is their right to request a solution that would bring them back in line with their peers. Moreover, there's precedent (Eastern MS) for magnet kids to have only one "true" elective, with another elective taken up with magnet classes.

The [b]process, however, has been so very bad. I mean, the kind of bad that destroys parent faith in administration and damages a school community for years.[/b]

First of all, the decision was presented to parents as "under discussion" when in reality it was a fait accompli. So there were teachers telling the kids it was a done deal even while the administration presented it to parents as "opening discussion."

Then, there was a weird series of lies and half-truths that the administration presented, and then retracted as soon as the parents started fact-checking. For example, parents were told that the change to 7 periods was necessary to keep class sizes from going up, but we learned last night that the shift would actually increase class size.

Then we were told that the shift was needed because of a growing student population at TPMS, but that was also retracted when parents started asking questions about where this increase was coming from.

We were also told that no other MS has block scheduling, and that it is considered too difficult/long for MS-aged brains, but parents found multiple examples in MCPS basically immediately.

The principal told some parents that she was seeking a solution that would preserve electives, but none of those solutions were presented to parents in the end. Maybe worse, she presented three schedules, two of which were clearly chosen only for their impossibility and leaving the community with only one option. It was that trick of showing people two terrible things and one slightly-less-terrible thing and then forcing them into the bad option.

This has been incredibly frustrating. It's clear that the principal is basically throwing explanations at the wall at this point and hoping one will stick. It's doing an incredible amount of damage, particularly given that one of the benefits of TPMS had long been its strong administration. It was previously a very well-run school but the new principal is obviously in over her head juggling multiple constituencies (students, teachers, parents) and failing to facilitate communication between any of them.

This is absolutely spot-on. Thank you. I hope the administration and central office are reading this thread because they should be VERY concerned especially about the bolded part. As a parent I’ve completely lost trust with the school.

Bolding fail - i meant this part:

The process, however, has been so very bad. I mean, the kind of bad that destroys parent faith in administration and damages a school community for years.

I'm the author of that long screed, and I'm also a long-time MCPS parent. I have one in college, one in HS, and one at TPMS. With that kind of longevity, I tend not to get too worked up over things, but this whole fiasco has pulled me out of my complacency.

It is clear that the TPMS administration has a tough challenge - some (not all) teachers want one thing, and a lot of parents/students want another. Bridging that gap, particularly when the teachers are unionized and the parents are....let's say extremely involved....was going to be a challenge for anyone.

But it didn't need to go like this. If the administration had been forthcoming from the beginning rather than setting up a whole Potemkin Village of fake consultation, we might still be stuck with the 7 period schedule next year but the community wouldn't be fractured over it. Parents wouldn't feel like they they'd been lied to, and like they need to fact-check everything the administration says because we've found so many untruths and half-truths to date.

The bottom line is that people don't like to be told untruths, don't like to be manipulated, and don't like to be presented with a wall of bureaucratic language when they ask simple questions about things like class size.

It's kind of funny going into 2025, because as a federal employee I'm getting ready to "welcome" yet another set of political appointees that don't know how to communicate or manage, and who fall back on partial truths and manipulation when something goes poorly, out of lack of experience and desire to appear authoritative. I just didn't think I'd need to see that at my child's school as well.

Anonymous wrote:It seems like the advocacy request should be for more teachers and/or more compensation for the teachers who are working beyond their contract. It isn’t reasonable to demand teachers work for free.

But then the question becomes, why should only TPMS students get 8 classes when most other MCPS students get 7? All students must take their 4 core classes, PE, and 2 electives. The choice of how to spend the 2 electives is language, arts, tech, other and in the case of the magnet an extra magnet period. It is all a choice.

It would be wonderful for all middle school students to take 4 core, PE, and 3 electives.

So we should ask for that: 3 electives for all. Or at a minimum compensation for the TPMS teachers providing extra.

It is tone deaf to expect the county to rally to protect a magnet school when most MCPS middle school students are getting a lot less than they need from school.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't see why the community should have been engaged at all. The mistake here was in even paying lip service. The principal should have just handed down a fiat and been done with it. The teachers were apparently doing something that was well above and beyond and outside of their contract. They decided they no longer wish to do this. Why should the community be consulted? What makes you think that you have the right to demand that the teachers do this, and that it should even be an option on the table to keep? And if it's not a real option, what is there to discuss with the community? Were you actually dumb enough to think that your screaming and tantrums would cause the school to say, "Oh yeah, then we'll keep forcing the teachers to do work they aren't paid for, to placate you?", or that it would be a good thing if they did? Get over yourself.

No one is making you go to the magnet. If you don't like it, go back to your home school. The other 99.9% of the county who never had this in the first place is hardly crying into their soup.

Magnet teachers try the best learners in the county, so they should be doing extra work in exchange for not having to deal with poorly behaved kids and disengaged kids. Plenty of teachers would love to take the place of the magnet teachers.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Nearing the conclusion of a “community engagement” over changing the bell schedule where the teachers voted for the outcome prior to any community engagement, the process completely lacked transparency, the community surveys were a joke where questions were overtly biased and obviously meant to support a particular outcome, the consequences of the change in bell schedule where only clearly stated to “shareholders” when the process was too far gone, the administration refused to share the data from the surveys, the administration refused to provide information regarding when the final outcome of the “community engagement” would be sent to central office for approval or who it will be sent to, afterthought meetings to special groups such as the magnet program, and absolutely zero meetings with other majorly affected groups such as the autism program and other programs for children requiring extra enrichment. Not to mention the 14 page Google doc the magnet parents wrote in questions to per administrations request was never responded to.
The bottom line, the arts and music programs at TPMS will be shells of their former selves with little to no magnet students, autism students, or students who need extra support being able to access these programs any longer.
Parents are threatening to pull their children and many feel like it’s been a huge bait and switch.
Any family who is considering this school for next year and wondering if a long commute would be worth your child’s time, should think long and hard.

Translation: I cannot get what I want, so I'm throwing tantrums and fear mongering.

No. Translation: with such heavy academics, kids deserve access to the arts and to have their mental health prioritized and the school they help to make look good should put at least some thought in to their wellbeing.

It’s not fear mongering. Making the community aware of a major change. There are many magnet families that only chose TPMS because of the schedule and access to arts as well as academics. Our kids commute nearly 3 hours a day to go to this school. If your kid was looking at that type of commute, do you think they’d choose it just to get the same thing they could get at their local school? Incoming kids and families deserve to know. The schedule is taking a hit and the electives program is taking a hit. It’s not just 1/3 of the school losing an arts elective. It will affect all the kids. More core subject teachers will be needed to make up for the decrease in number of classes taught per teacher but the budget is still for the same amount of teachers. That means less elective teachers because of that and because every kid is taking one less elective. It means less choice, less variety. The robustness and quality of the school will go down overall.


It’s not just parents no getting their way. It has far reaching affects for all students.

It’s a choice. Three hour a day commute is absurd. They should limit it to down county. Go private.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm surprised MCPS would gut TPMS. I thought it was considered one of the golden schools in the system? But the rest of the stuff you described in terms of lack of transparency, disregarding community input, etc. is very much textbook MCPS.

I just didn't think they'd do that to Takoma Park!

The teachers voted to go from teaching 6 classes to 5. They voted to keep class size at current level. Said a few more per class was absolutely not doable.

Translates to one less elective for everyone. And for any special program student, magnet or otherwise, means they only have one. Most of the magnet students were pushed in to taking a language as an elective and so now must choose between an actual elective and language. The majority will choose language. The school openly acknowledges that the number of electives teachers will decrease- the majority of which are music and art teachers. The majority of magnet kids (1/3 of the school) had their “2nd elective” in the arts- many in band/orchestra.

As for the autism program and other programs where kids need enrichments, they will loose those enrichments or have zero electives.


The administration “promises” to review “mitigation strategies” at some point. Fat chance.

That’s normal for most ms.

Most MS are local schools. Who wants a long commute where you don’t get anything more than you’d get locally? Turns out, there are many who don’t.

So only kids whose home school is crappy will choose the magnet. Win for equity.

Locally normed equity! Kids from the “smart schools” with higher test scores will no longer go and many kids already there will not be returning. It will be a shell of a magnet.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'd like to try and summarize so I can keep this straight in my head.

TPMS currently has an 8 period schedule and teachers voted to move it to a 7 period schedule. This is inline with other MCPS MS but the vote did not engage the community (parents). Teachers also voted not to increase class size.

As an example: if a grade has 100 kids. There used to be 5 periods of English available so there would be 20 kids in a class. Now there are only 4 periods of English available so there would be 25 kids in a class. However, teachers also did not want class size to increase.

So budget will have to be allocated to increase teachers for core classes to keep the class size the same. The budget will come from a decrease in the art and music budget. As there will be less teachers for art and music, there will be less elective periods available and now students will be limited to one elective (language, art, or music)

Did I get all of that correct?

This is all correct. As someone inside the school community, I'd say there are two issues here, the content of the decision and the process of the decision.

The content of the decision is fairly defensible. Teachers were working beyond the contract, and it is their right to request a solution that would bring them back in line with their peers. Moreover, there's precedent (Eastern MS) for magnet kids to have only one "true" elective, with another elective taken up with magnet classes.

The [b]process, however, has been so very bad. I mean, the kind of bad that destroys parent faith in administration and damages a school community for years.[/b]

First of all, the decision was presented to parents as "under discussion" when in reality it was a fait accompli. So there were teachers telling the kids it was a done deal even while the administration presented it to parents as "opening discussion."

Then, there was a weird series of lies and half-truths that the administration presented, and then retracted as soon as the parents started fact-checking. For example, parents were told that the change to 7 periods was necessary to keep class sizes from going up, but we learned last night that the shift would actually increase class size.

Then we were told that the shift was needed because of a growing student population at TPMS, but that was also retracted when parents started asking questions about where this increase was coming from.

We were also told that no other MS has block scheduling, and that it is considered too difficult/long for MS-aged brains, but parents found multiple examples in MCPS basically immediately.

The principal told some parents that she was seeking a solution that would preserve electives, but none of those solutions were presented to parents in the end. Maybe worse, she presented three schedules, two of which were clearly chosen only for their impossibility and leaving the community with only one option. It was that trick of showing people two terrible things and one slightly-less-terrible thing and then forcing them into the bad option.

This has been incredibly frustrating. It's clear that the principal is basically throwing explanations at the wall at this point and hoping one will stick. It's doing an incredible amount of damage, particularly given that one of the benefits of TPMS had long been its strong administration. It was previously a very well-run school but the new principal is obviously in over her head juggling multiple constituencies (students, teachers, parents) and failing to facilitate communication between any of them.

This is absolutely spot-on. Thank you. I hope the administration and central office are reading this thread because they should be VERY concerned especially about the bolded part. As a parent I’ve completely lost trust with the school.

Bolding fail - i meant this part:

The process, however, has been so very bad. I mean, the kind of bad that destroys parent faith in administration and damages a school community for years.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Ma’am this is a Wendy’s.

What on earth does that mean?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'd like to try and summarize so I can keep this straight in my head.

TPMS currently has an 8 period schedule and teachers voted to move it to a 7 period schedule. This is inline with other MCPS MS but the vote did not engage the community (parents). Teachers also voted not to increase class size.

As an example: if a grade has 100 kids. There used to be 5 periods of English available so there would be 20 kids in a class. Now there are only 4 periods of English available so there would be 25 kids in a class. However, teachers also did not want class size to increase.

So budget will have to be allocated to increase teachers for core classes to keep the class size the same. The budget will come from a decrease in the art and music budget. As there will be less teachers for art and music, there will be less elective periods available and now students will be limited to one elective (language, art, or music)

Did I get all of that correct?

What parent wouldn’t prefer their kid be in a class of 20 rather than 25? Five extra kids vying for the teacher’s attention vs. private music or art lessons is an easy call.

It’s a matter of class size AND time. If the teachers have an extra class, they have less time to grade and prep lessons.

So the 25 in one class can get a better experience than the 20 in another, simply because the teacher had more time. Classes don’t create themselves; they are the product of many hours of preparation.

And frankly? I’ve taught classes of 36 and 38. 25 sounds like a dream.

Is anyone naive enough to think that with one less class and a few less kids in a class, any teacher will make any more effort to engage the kids? The excuse will always be the same no matter what you decrease it to. Teachers are a population of woe is me folks who do nothing but tantrum about how unfair everything is.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The school has resolutely failed in communication, lied to parents repeatedly and ignored any feedback, presented flawed data, collected biased surveys and just gone ahead and done what they want to anyway. The principal does not support the magnet and has done her best to drive away some of the best teaching staff. Now she plans to sit back and watch while the arts programming is decimated by this change and magnet students flee back to their home schools.

In other words, kids are supposed to be there for exceptional opportunities in STEM, but will leave over music —which is incredibly easy to supplement at home and most kids who are serious about music take outside lessons anyway. Sure, Jan.

Anonymous wrote:I don't see why the community should have been engaged at all. The mistake here was in even paying lip service. The principal should have just handed down a fiat and been done with it. The teachers were apparently doing something that was well above and beyond and outside of their contract. They decided they no longer wish to do this. Why should the community be consulted? What makes you think that you have the right to demand that the teachers do this, and that it should even be an option on the table to keep? And if it's not a real option, what is there to discuss with the community? Were you actually dumb enough to think that your screaming and tantrums would cause the school to say, "Oh yeah, then we'll keep forcing the teachers to do work they aren't paid for, to placate you?", or that it would be a good thing if they did? Get over yourself.

No one is making you go to the magnet. If you don't like it, go back to your home school. The other 99.9% of the county who never had this in the first place is hardly crying into their soup.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't see why the community should have been engaged at all. The mistake here was in even paying lip service. The principal should have just handed down a fiat and been done with it. The teachers were apparently doing something that was well above and beyond and outside of their contract. They decided they no longer wish to do this. Why should the community be consulted? What makes you think that you have the right to demand that the teachers do this, and that it should even be an option on the table to keep? And if it's not a real option, what is there to discuss with the community? Were you actually dumb enough to think that your screaming and tantrums would cause the school to say, "Oh yeah, then we'll keep forcing the teachers to do work they aren't paid for, to placate you?", or that it would be a good thing if they did? Get over yourself.

No one is making you go to the magnet. If you don't like it, go back to your home school. The other 99.9% of the county who never had this in the first place is hardly crying into their soup.

The community needed to be engaged because that’s the process as outlined by MCPS. The fact that they are only paying lip service to doing so is what has outraged so many families.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The school has resolutely failed in communication, lied to parents repeatedly and ignored any feedback, presented flawed data, collected biased surveys and just gone ahead and done what they want to anyway. The principal does not support the magnet and has done her best to drive away some of the best teaching staff. Now she plans to sit back and watch while the arts programming is decimated by this change and magnet students flee back to their home schools.

In other words, kids are supposed to be there for exceptional opportunities in STEM, but will leave over music —which is incredibly easy to supplement at home and most kids who are serious about music take outside lessons anyway. Sure, Jan.