Anonymous wrote:The magnet students are not in a separate part of the school..nor do they have separate lunch. The magnet is only 4 classes a day. The other are mixed in with the rest of the school.

Yes, they stay an extra period at the end of the day but otherwise are on the same bell schedule.

The magnet students are not in a separate part of the school..nor do they have separate lunch. The magnet is only 4 classes a day. The other are mixed in with the rest of the school.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Will the quality of the program suffer? I am a professor at a tier 1 university. We admit students under affirmative action. Has the quality of the academic programs changed? I would argue no, most professors teach the same content and grade accordingly. Unfortunately, a few students fail or receive D's because they are not prepared. Most earn B's and C's because the work is difficult.


But this is yet another gap. MCPS does not want that gap. They must then find a way to bring everyone in the magnet to the same level...likely by lowering the bar.

This is what people are REALLY worry about. Parents don't care (and kids sure don't) what color students are... As long as they are good enough to get in without changing admission criteria or special considerations and good enough to keep up.

They also care that their kids don't mix with the local kids and or get shipped out of their local inbounds school. Magnet was set up as a way to get middle class kids white kids to volunteer into minority dense schools. As a compromise the school set them up to have a different schudgle, bells, lunch and section of the school. Do you think it was set up that way so the imports could soak up the diversity? Do you think as many parents would be so excited for the program if it wasn't set up that way? If you said yes to either you're naïve or in denial.

Does anyone have enough experience with say the Blair magnet to know how the kids who take Magnet Geometry in 9th grade actually do over the four years?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Will the quality of the program suffer? I am a professor at a tier 1 university. We admit students under affirmative action. Has the quality of the academic programs changed? I would argue no, most professors teach the same content and grade accordingly. Unfortunately, a few students fail or receive D's because they are not prepared. Most earn B's and C's because the work is difficult.


But this is yet another gap. MCPS does not want that gap. They must then find a way to bring everyone in the magnet to the same level...likely by lowering the bar.

But that is what grades are for. Did I miss something--are we talking about pass/fail? What do you mean by bringing everyone to the same level? How is this measured--by grades, standardized tests? Isn't the gap between not proficient and proficient?

In theory yes..grades should show the difference between the outstanding student, the proficient student and the failing student. But somehow in public school in 2016, it is not acceptable to have these differences. No child left behind. Advanced (?!) curriculums for all. That is why there is a concern that giving preferential acceptance to certain kids will end up lowering the caliber of the whole program in order to avoid showing a gap in grades and test scores.

I agree with the earlier statement of not wanting to lower the bar. I would support some method that allowed for hand picking 25 Latino/black students who didn't apply to the magnet for entry into the program so long as it was done using academic criteria so that it's clear that the students should be able to succeed in the magnet. Takoma has a neighborhood preference that lets in an additional 25.

I know of a black male student who is stellar academically and hasn't been in the magnets. He's the type of kid who should be encouraged vs the gen pop kid who's passions are non-academic and doesn't desire the rigor.

I suspect that getting different kids/families to apply means taking a different approach to make them feel welcome. A more personalized approach may be necessary.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Will the quality of the program suffer? I am a professor at a tier 1 university. We admit students under affirmative action. Has the quality of the academic programs changed? I would argue no, most professors teach the same content and grade accordingly. Unfortunately, a few students fail or receive D's because they are not prepared. Most earn B's and C's because the work is difficult.


But this is yet another gap. MCPS does not want that gap. They must then find a way to bring everyone in the magnet to the same level...likely by lowering the bar.

But that is what grades are for. Did I miss something--are we talking about pass/fail? What do you mean by bringing everyone to the same level? How is this measured--by grades, standardized tests? Isn't the gap between not proficient and proficient?

The big picture issue is that the kids seem to get on divergent paths early on and the gap between two paths gets wider as kids get older. Blacks/Latinos on one path, whites/Asians on another path. By the time they get to HS, the gap is so wide, no one knows how to fix it - check out the avg SAT scores or racial mixture of courses kids are taking. You can close the gap by raising the lower bar or lowering the upper bar or both. Parents are concerned the MCPS will close the gap by lowering the bar as PP stated.

Anonymous wrote:Will the quality of the program suffer? I am a professor at a tier 1 university. We admit students under affirmative action. Has the quality of the academic programs changed? I would argue no, most professors teach the same content and grade accordingly. Unfortunately, a few students fail or receive D's because they are not prepared. Most earn B's and C's because the work is difficult.


But this is yet another gap. MCPS does not want that gap. They must then find a way to bring everyone in the magnet to the same level...likely by lowering the bar.

But that is what grades are for. Did I miss something--are we talking about pass/fail? What do you mean by bringing everyone to the same level? How is this measured--by grades, standardized tests? Isn't the gap between not proficient and proficient?

Anonymous wrote:Will the quality of the program suffer? I am a professor at a tier 1 university. We admit students under affirmative action. Has the quality of the academic programs changed? I would argue no, most professors teach the same content and grade accordingly. Unfortunately, a few students fail or receive D's because they are not prepared. Most earn B's and C's because the work is difficult.


But this is yet another gap. MCPS does not want that gap. They must then find a way to bring everyone in the magnet to the same level...likely by lowering the bar.

Affirmative action students are also found to be more likely to major in soft subjects like sociology, majors ending in studies, etc. Not a good comparison to a STEM magnet program.

Anonymous wrote:Will the quality of the program suffer? I am a professor at a tier 1 university. We admit students under affirmative action. Has the quality of the academic programs changed? I would argue no, most professors teach the same content and grade accordingly. Unfortunately, a few students fail or receive D's because they are not prepared. Most earn B's and C's because the work is difficult.


But this is yet another gap. MCPS does not want that gap. They must then find a way to bring everyone in the magnet to the same level...likely by lowering the bar.

This is what people are REALLY worry about. Parents don't care (and kids sure don't) what color students are... As long as they are good enough to get in without changing admission criteria or special considerations and good enough to keep up.

Will the quality of the program suffer? I am a professor at a tier 1 university. We admit students under affirmative action. Has the quality of the academic programs changed? I would argue no, most professors teach the same content and grade accordingly. Unfortunately, a few students fail or receive D's because they are not prepared. Most earn B's and C's because the work is difficult.


But this is yet another gap. MCPS does not want that gap. They must then find a way to bring everyone in the magnet to the same level...likely by lowering the bar.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The magnet programs at Blair are considered very successful at bringing more diversity and strong academic students to Blair. That was the initial goal. The current goal is to make the magnets themselves more diverse which is entirely different. If the magnets are forced to mirror MCPS as a whole in acceptances, Blair will likely be more heavily minority by reducing the white/Asian populations which currently dominate the magnets...

Are you suggesting that the program without as many whits/Asian won't do as well? Where did you get that idea from?

But it's fair to say MCPS magnets are mostly whites/Asians. Lowing admission standards to have more PC mix of kids will lower the quality of magnet programs.

Will the quality of the program suffer? I am a professor at a tier 1 university. We admit students under affirmative action. Has the quality of the academic programs changed? I would argue no, most professors teach the same content and grade accordingly. Unfortunately, a few students fail or receive D's because they are not prepared. Most earn B's and C's because the work is difficult.

How would this be different in high school? Any teachers want to weigh in? I believe the biggest factors would be pressure to pass students or performance on standardized tests.

HS programs are much smaller than college incoming class size. Each program is only about 100 kids. Including kids who are not ready, prepared, or cannot keep up will definitely negatively affect the programs. It sounds bad but it is what it is.

add, I would assume "every child succeeds act" won't apply to college.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The magnet programs at Blair are considered very successful at bringing more diversity and strong academic students to Blair. That was the initial goal. The current goal is to make the magnets themselves more diverse which is entirely different. If the magnets are forced to mirror MCPS as a whole in acceptances, Blair will likely be more heavily minority by reducing the white/Asian populations which currently dominate the magnets...

Are you suggesting that the program without as many whits/Asian won't do as well? Where did you get that idea from?

But it's fair to say MCPS magnets are mostly whites/Asians. Lowing admission standards to have more PC mix of kids will lower the quality of magnet programs.

Will the quality of the program suffer? I am a professor at a tier 1 university. We admit students under affirmative action. Has the quality of the academic programs changed? I would argue no, most professors teach the same content and grade accordingly. Unfortunately, a few students fail or receive D's because they are not prepared. Most earn B's and C's because the work is difficult.

How would this be different in high school? Any teachers want to weigh in? I believe the biggest factors would be pressure to pass students or performance on standardized tests.

HS programs are much smaller than college incoming class size. Each program is only about 100 kids. Including kids who are not ready, prepared, or cannot keep up will definitely negatively affect the programs. It sounds bad but it is what it is.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:No..not at all. I am just pointing out that the initial goal and the new goal are different. Nowhere does my post attempt to predict how the new goals will affect the scores or the program. It is sad that you have jumped to this conclusion.

But to raise a different point, the initial goal was a failure from the start. There's a 1994 study, http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED374202.pdf, referenced in the Choice Study that reached this conclusion even twenty years ago. Comparing the demographics quoted in that study to the numbers today, it's pretty clear things haven't improved. From the conclusion of the earlier report:

The magnet school program and other self-regulated policies designed to foster racial integration are unreliable and ineffective means for achieving desegregated schools. The policies and programs as they are presently designed and administered in MCPS simply have not been strong or effective enough to offset the demographic change that contributes to school segregation and concentrations of poverty in the public schools.

Anyway, it is evidence of MCPS doing nothing in the face of criticism, so the folks reading doom into Recommendation 3A probably have little to worry about. But anyone who wants to support the magnets should just drop these claims of demographics and just argue on the merits of the actual programs.

Depends on who you ask about that failure:

A 2006 Caltech study found that the magnet program at Montgomery Blair High School helped prevent or even reverse "white flight" from surrounding neighborhoods, and may have even played a role in the revitalization of downtown Silver Spring. If Montgomery County wants to revitalize communities like Glenmont or White Oak, schools like Kennedy and Springbrook must become attractive to higher-income families again.

I find it so ironic how whites are the cause for racism yet are the only ones to "revitalize" communities and restore rigor to schools.

Isn't that what magnets are really about? to desegregate?

Magnet and choice plans have become widespread across the nation and the great majority were devisedas ways to create desegregation, according to a 1994 federal assessment.

http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED374202.pdf

Yes, that study notes that these programs are wide spread and devised to create desegregation, but it concludes, using MCPS circa 1994 as evidence, that this doesn't actually work! Placing the magnet at Blair failed to have any effect that could be disentangled from the demographic changes that were already occurring in the area. The Choice Study reaches the same conclusion--school with in a school magnets don't benefit the general population.

PP mentioned the Caltech paper from 2006, which the Choice Study doesn't cite, maybe they were cherry picking. However as someone who lives near Blair, I find it implausible that the return of middle class families to the area and revitalization of Silver Spring can be attributed to the prestige of the magnet. Certainly when I bought a house, pre-kids, I wasn't thinking maybe someday my kids will brush elbows with 100 classmates from a test in magnet. Close in suburbs have been rehabbing, this is a national trend.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The magnet programs at Blair are considered very successful at bringing more diversity and strong academic students to Blair. That was the initial goal. The current goal is to make the magnets themselves more diverse which is entirely different. If the magnets are forced to mirror MCPS as a whole in acceptances, Blair will likely be more heavily minority by reducing the white/Asian populations which currently dominate the magnets...

Are you suggesting that the program without as many whits/Asian won't do as well? Where did you get that idea from?

But it's fair to say MCPS magnets are mostly whites/Asians. Lowing admission standards to have more PC mix of kids will lower the quality of magnet programs.

Will the quality of the program suffer? I am a professor at a tier 1 university. We admit students under affirmative action. Has the quality of the academic programs changed? I would argue no, most professors teach the same content and grade accordingly. Unfortunately, a few students fail or receive D's because they are not prepared. Most earn B's and C's because the work is difficult.

How would this be different in high school? Any teachers want to weigh in? I believe the biggest factors would be pressure to pass students or performance on standardized tests.