Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They tried putting high profile programs in low income schools. How are those IB programs going at Watkins Mill and Kennedy?

I thought the Watkins Mill IB program was considered pretty successful? I know the one at Kennedy is not good and is generally avoided but that doesn't make all of them bad

Not sure I'd consider Watkins Mill successful.... https://www.boarddocs.com/mabe/mcpsmd/Board.nsf/files/DHXL5Z54F2FC/$file/MCPS%20IB%20Program%20Statistics.pdf

And yes, it's still a new program. But MCPS also hasn't done any analysis to determine what is working and what isn't.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It doesn't matter what consortiums are called or which programs and created or folded, there were good schools and the rest getting by and there will be good schools with the rest just getting by after this. The only changes being a couple will shuffle around from mid tiers schools to losers and a couple just getting by into mid tier but the strong ones will be the same. All the gripes i see on this board are from the mid tier schools afraid of going backwards draping themself in the flag of justice. But if it took a disproportionate amount of funds to make a DCC school look less mediocre then what is it really whats the justice on shifting those funds to prop up a couple inside on one? Blair got to be mid tier by picking off motivated students from the DCC and pulling in hundreds of affluent rock stars, sure on paper it looks less DCC but it was really inflicting on the home schools of those kids what it is decrying will happen to it when it is clustered to better schools and loses the STEM program. All while not making a huge difference to its local kids other than appeasing the middle class who owned homes IB to it. Now each cluster will have a best school and many will have access to a W they never had before. Seems like a step in the right direction

What do you mean by "But if it took a disproportionate amount of funds to make a DCC school look less mediocre then what is it really whats the justice on shifting those funds to prop up a couple inside on one?" Schools like Einstein and Northwood are not mid-tier because of a disproportionate amount of funds being spent on them (and I don't see any reason to think they "look less mediocre than [they] really [are]") and the issue is not that funds are being shifted away from them, it's that they are going to lose half or more of their advanced kids to Blair, BCC, and Whitman and may well end up in an academic death spiral. MCPS easily could have avoided this by putting academic programs for high-achievers like IB and humanities at Einstein and Northwood rather than BCC and Whitman (which would have helped Einstein and Northwood without hurting BCC and Whitman at all), but they just don't care. I'm sure the same story is going on in other regions too.

Einstein and Northwood don't have the same course offerings as the W schools, so the assumption that many of us want to be at W schools isn't accurate. What's going to happen due to lack of offerings, which are going to decline more with the redistricting and losing students/staff is a greater divide in course offerings and families whose kids prop up these schools with higher scores are going to flee. Many of us cannot make the transportation to somewhere like Whitman, nor would I ever want my kids at that school. We could afford a W school home comfortably, but we don't want that kind of enviroment for our kids. We are going to monitor things but we may move to somewhere like Howard as we are not pleased with MCPS. We have some great individual teachers, but the admin at our schools are terrible and not responsive and they are tone death to kids needs/wants.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The NAACP wrote a letter supporting it.

You mean Byron Jones wrote a letter supporting it.

That’s no different that MCCPTA. How many PTA members sign onto their letters? I’ve been a member in four different school PTA and the level of engagement from the delegate in conveying information between the county level and school has been minimal to nonexistent.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They tried putting high profile programs in low income schools. How are those IB programs going at Watkins Mill and Kennedy?

I thought the Watkins Mill IB program was considered pretty successful? I know the one at Kennedy is not good and is generally avoided but that doesn't make all of them bad

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The NAACP wrote a letter supporting it.

You mean Byron Jones wrote a letter supporting it.

That’s no different that MCCPTA. How many PTA members sign onto their letters? I’ve been a member in four different school PTA and the level of engagement from the delegate in conveying information between the county level and school has been minimal to nonexistent.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The NAACP wrote a letter supporting it.

You mean Byron Jones wrote a letter supporting it.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It doesn't matter what consortiums are called or which programs and created or folded, there were good schools and the rest getting by and there will be good schools with the rest just getting by after this. The only changes being a couple will shuffle around from mid tiers schools to losers and a couple just getting by into mid tier but the strong ones will be the same. All the gripes i see on this board are from the mid tier schools afraid of going backwards draping themself in the flag of justice. But if it took a disproportionate amount of funds to make a DCC school look less mediocre then what is it really whats the justice on shifting those funds to prop up a couple inside on one? Blair got to be mid tier by picking off motivated students from the DCC and pulling in hundreds of affluent rock stars, sure on paper it looks less DCC but it was really inflicting on the home schools of those kids what it is decrying will happen to it when it is clustered to better schools and loses the STEM program. All while not making a huge difference to its local kids other than appeasing the middle class who owned homes IB to it. Now each cluster will have a best school and many will have access to a W they never had before. Seems like a step in the right direction

Many of us don't want our kids at a W school. You all keep pushing and believing we do but if we did we'd be living in your community. Best is subjective.

It’s obvious that there is a person or a few people who look down what they view as elitism at Whitman, while simultaneously shouting they are wealthy and that their “smart” kids “prop up” the scores at Einstein. I fully believe you don’t want your kids at a W school. I don’t think it’s because you’re actually worried about the influences for your kids. I think you likely have discomfort due to some social inferiority complex where you didn’t feel like you exactly fit in growing up in that type of environment. I don’t think you represent the majority of students/families at your school, who may or may not be eager to accept a spot at a school they couldn’t otherwise access.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It doesn't matter what consortiums are called or which programs and created or folded, there were good schools and the rest getting by and there will be good schools with the rest just getting by after this. The only changes being a couple will shuffle around from mid tiers schools to losers and a couple just getting by into mid tier but the strong ones will be the same. All the gripes i see on this board are from the mid tier schools afraid of going backwards draping themself in the flag of justice. But if it took a disproportionate amount of funds to make a DCC school look less mediocre then what is it really whats the justice on shifting those funds to prop up a couple inside on one? Blair got to be mid tier by picking off motivated students from the DCC and pulling in hundreds of affluent rock stars, sure on paper it looks less DCC but it was really inflicting on the home schools of those kids what it is decrying will happen to it when it is clustered to better schools and loses the STEM program. All while not making a huge difference to its local kids other than appeasing the middle class who owned homes IB to it. Now each cluster will have a best school and many will have access to a W they never had before. Seems like a step in the right direction

Many of us don't want our kids at a W school. You all keep pushing and believing we do but if we did we'd be living in your community. Best is subjective.

It’s obvious that there is a person or a few people who look down what they view as elitism at Whitman, while simultaneously shouting they are wealthy and that their “smart” kids “prop up” the scores at Einstein. I fully believe you don’t want your kids at a W school. I don’t think it’s because you’re actually worried about the influences for your kids. I think you likely have discomfort due to some social inferiority complex where you didn’t feel like you exactly fit in growing up in that type of environment. I don’t think you represent the majority of students/families at your school, who may or may not be eager to accept a spot at a school they couldn’t otherwise access.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It doesn't matter what consortiums are called or which programs and created or folded, there were good schools and the rest getting by and there will be good schools with the rest just getting by after this. The only changes being a couple will shuffle around from mid tiers schools to losers and a couple just getting by into mid tier but the strong ones will be the same. All the gripes i see on this board are from the mid tier schools afraid of going backwards draping themself in the flag of justice. But if it took a disproportionate amount of funds to make a DCC school look less mediocre then what is it really whats the justice on shifting those funds to prop up a couple inside on one? Blair got to be mid tier by picking off motivated students from the DCC and pulling in hundreds of affluent rock stars, sure on paper it looks less DCC but it was really inflicting on the home schools of those kids what it is decrying will happen to it when it is clustered to better schools and loses the STEM program. All while not making a huge difference to its local kids other than appeasing the middle class who owned homes IB to it. Now each cluster will have a best school and many will have access to a W they never had before. Seems like a step in the right direction

Many of us don't want our kids at a W school. You all keep pushing and believing we do but if we did we'd be living in your community. Best is subjective.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They tried putting high profile programs in low income schools. How are those IB programs going at Watkins Mill and Kennedy?

I thought the Watkins Mill IB program was considered pretty successful? I know the one at Kennedy is not good and is generally avoided but that doesn't make all of them bad

Anonymous wrote:They tried putting high profile programs in low income schools. How are those IB programs going at Watkins Mill and Kennedy?

Anonymous wrote:It doesn't matter what consortiums are called or which programs and created or folded, there were good schools and the rest getting by and there will be good schools with the rest just getting by after this. The only changes being a couple will shuffle around from mid tiers schools to losers and a couple just getting by into mid tier but the strong ones will be the same. All the gripes i see on this board are from the mid tier schools afraid of going backwards draping themself in the flag of justice. But if it took a disproportionate amount of funds to make a DCC school look less mediocre then what is it really whats the justice on shifting those funds to prop up a couple inside on one? Blair got to be mid tier by picking off motivated students from the DCC and pulling in hundreds of affluent rock stars, sure on paper it looks less DCC but it was really inflicting on the home schools of those kids what it is decrying will happen to it when it is clustered to better schools and loses the STEM program. All while not making a huge difference to its local kids other than appeasing the middle class who owned homes IB to it. Now each cluster will have a best school and many will have access to a W they never had before. Seems like a step in the right direction

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It doesn't matter what consortiums are called or which programs and created or folded, there were good schools and the rest getting by and there will be good schools with the rest just getting by after this. The only changes being a couple will shuffle around from mid tiers schools to losers and a couple just getting by into mid tier but the strong ones will be the same. All the gripes i see on this board are from the mid tier schools afraid of going backwards draping themself in the flag of justice. But if it took a disproportionate amount of funds to make a DCC school look less mediocre then what is it really whats the justice on shifting those funds to prop up a couple inside on one? Blair got to be mid tier by picking off motivated students from the DCC and pulling in hundreds of affluent rock stars, sure on paper it looks less DCC but it was really inflicting on the home schools of those kids what it is decrying will happen to it when it is clustered to better schools and loses the STEM program. All while not making a huge difference to its local kids other than appeasing the middle class who owned homes IB to it. Now each cluster will have a best school and many will have access to a W they never had before. Seems like a step in the right direction

What do you mean by "But if it took a disproportionate amount of funds to make a DCC school look less mediocre then what is it really whats the justice on shifting those funds to prop up a couple inside on one?" Schools like Einstein and Northwood are not mid-tier because of a disproportionate amount of funds being spent on them (and I don't see any reason to think they "look less mediocre than [they] really [are]") and the issue is not that funds are being shifted away from them, it's that they are going to lose half or more of their advanced kids to Blair, BCC, and Whitman and may well end up in an academic death spiral. MCPS easily could have avoided this by putting academic programs for high-achievers like IB and humanities at Einstein and Northwood rather than BCC and Whitman (which would have helped Einstein and Northwood without hurting BCC and Whitman at all), but they just don't care. I'm sure the same story is going on in other regions too.

DP

I think region 1 is interesting because:

- you have BCC and Whitman which don't currently send a lot of kids to RMIB or SMCS so definitely won't start sending them now. I guess it saves money if they only have to transport kids in one direction but wow.
- this history of BCC refusing to be part of the DCC and so now I think some people in MCPS think they are righting some historical wrong. When it's actually a lot more complicated than that. Part of why I really wish they had actually discussed the reasons for dismantling the DCC and NEC before they voted to dismantle it.
- MCPS staff decided to just throw programs at Whitman and BCC for the optics and cost savings instead of caring what the impacts will be. IB and engineering at BCC just sounds like they care a heck of a lot more about BCC than they do Einstein or Northwood. Like the biotech program idea seems half baked - how many kids are going to be excited about getting a certification to be a non college educated technician in a biotech manufacturing plant while also taking HL IB science courses? Who is this program even for?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It doesn't matter what consortiums are called or which programs and created or folded, there were good schools and the rest getting by and there will be good schools with the rest just getting by after this. The only changes being a couple will shuffle around from mid tiers schools to losers and a couple just getting by into mid tier but the strong ones will be the same. All the gripes i see on this board are from the mid tier schools afraid of going backwards draping themself in the flag of justice. But if it took a disproportionate amount of funds to make a DCC school look less mediocre then what is it really whats the justice on shifting those funds to prop up a couple inside on one? Blair got to be mid tier by picking off motivated students from the DCC and pulling in hundreds of affluent rock stars, sure on paper it looks less DCC but it was really inflicting on the home schools of those kids what it is decrying will happen to it when it is clustered to better schools and loses the STEM program. All while not making a huge difference to its local kids other than appeasing the middle class who owned homes IB to it. Now each cluster will have a best school and many will have access to a W they never had before. Seems like a step in the right direction

What do you mean by "But if it took a disproportionate amount of funds to make a DCC school look less mediocre then what is it really whats the justice on shifting those funds to prop up a couple inside on one?" Schools like Einstein and Northwood are not mid-tier because of a disproportionate amount of funds being spent on them (and I don't see any reason to think they "look less mediocre than [they] really [are]") and the issue is not that funds are being shifted away from them, it's that they are going to lose half or more of their advanced kids to Blair, BCC, and Whitman and may well end up in an academic death spiral. MCPS easily could have avoided this by putting academic programs for high-achievers like IB and humanities at Einstein and Northwood rather than BCC and Whitman (which would have helped Einstein and Northwood without hurting BCC and Whitman at all), but they just don't care. I'm sure the same story is going on in other regions too.