Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Board docs are up with a lot more clarity on what they are proposing. Looks like 6 regions. They name the groups of schools they propose in each region. This would all take effect in Fall 2027, so applications to high school program by region would be for the newly rising 7th graders.

I’d have a lot of questions if I had a rising 8th grader who may or may not have access to the old high school program options, but probably not the new options but may also have different home school assignments for 9th and 10th depending on the boundary changes.

Link?

https://go.boarddocs.com/mabe/mcpsmd/Board.nsf/files/DHUTPZ7866CF/$file/Program%20Analysis%20Boundary%20Studies%20Update%20250624%20PPT.pdf

Link no longer works

Interesting — keep an eye on the board agenda and see if it gets re-linked: https://go.boarddocs.com/mabe/mcpsmd/Board.nsf/goto?open&id=DH5NE95EFED0

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Board docs are up with a lot more clarity on what they are proposing. Looks like 6 regions. They name the groups of schools they propose in each region. This would all take effect in Fall 2027, so applications to high school program by region would be for the newly rising 7th graders.

I’d have a lot of questions if I had a rising 8th grader who may or may not have access to the old high school program options, but probably not the new options but may also have different home school assignments for 9th and 10th depending on the boundary changes.

Link?

https://go.boarddocs.com/mabe/mcpsmd/Board.nsf/files/DHUTPZ7866CF/$file/Program%20Analysis%20Boundary%20Studies%20Update%20250624%20PPT.pdf

Link no longer works

Anonymous wrote:Looks like they are proposing the DCC and NEC go away?

Yeah but it looks like they are being replaced with similar regions everywhere? Not totally random choice but both criteria and interest based?

Looks like they are proposing the DCC and NEC go away?

I can’t believe that they are not picking up on the feedback about long bus rides for students within the Woodward walk zone to Kennedy. They need to get out to the apartments in the cluster and ask people in person.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:ETA: and the Blair and RM parents who are complaining about the quality of the program declining if it becomes regional are horrible snobs. Your gifted kid can learn with other gifted local kids! They don’t have to be with only gifted kids from all around the whole county! Give me a break. So snobby!

Is MOP snobby?

The quality of the program would definitely decline if, instead of taking top 100 kids it took the top 1000. It’s already a very tough, challenging program that only the top third or so truly excel in. Expanding without reducing the standards will just set some kids up for failure or more likely dilute the program.

You're assuming that the 100 kids in the program are the top and would forever be. You are also assume there is not another 900 kids who could/would succeed in such program if the seats and program structure were available.

The true value of these programs as they exist today is the strength of the cohort, which would not be the case if it were watered down.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:ETA: and the Blair and RM parents who are complaining about the quality of the program declining if it becomes regional are horrible snobs. Your gifted kid can learn with other gifted local kids! They don’t have to be with only gifted kids from all around the whole county! Give me a break. So snobby!

Is MOP snobby?

The quality of the program would definitely decline if, instead of taking top 100 kids it took the top 1000. It’s already a very tough, challenging program that only the top third or so truly excel in. Expanding without reducing the standards will just set some kids up for failure or more likely dilute the program.

You're assuming that the 100 kids in the program are the top and would forever be. You are also assume there is not another 900 kids who could/would succeed in such program if the seats and program structure were available.

Are there 1000 summer research internships even available for SMCS? My kids was at RM when PYP projects became mandatory for all kids. It was a joke. Teachers were mentoring way too many kids. Most kids did as little as they could to check the box. It was pass/fail. I am guessing SMCS research curriculum would meet the same fate.

From the Board docs, it looks like they are creating 6 consortiums. DCC is being split up.

Anonymous wrote:So are they basically going to create more consortiums like DCC and NEC? So every HS is part of a consortium and there is choice within that? If so, that seems like a major change that should be subject to public input. I hope they don't just announce it and move it forward.

Public input is so last year. Democracy is no longer in fashion.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Board docs are up with a lot more clarity on what they are proposing. Looks like 6 regions. They name the groups of schools they propose in each region. This would all take effect in Fall 2027, so applications to high school program by region would be for the newly rising 7th graders.

I’d have a lot of questions if I had a rising 8th grader who may or may not have access to the old high school program options, but probably not the new options but may also have different home school assignments for 9th and 10th depending on the boundary changes.

Link?

https://go.boarddocs.com/mabe/mcpsmd/Board.nsf/files/DHUTPZ7866CF/$file/Program%20Analysis%20Boundary%20Studies%20Update%20250624%20PPT.pdf

I was trying to think how it will tie to boundary studies when it comes to capacity utilization.

I am trying to visualize a sitaution where for some program, more kids from entire region will be interested and for some program not many may be interested. For example, 100 seats are in one program. 20 for home high school and 80 from outside. We may face situation where one set of 100 seats are in high demand and fills up but another set of 100 seats fills only half. Multiply it by 4 you get 200 empty seats in some high schools.

I may be missing something here, but anyone with more information can chime in.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Board docs are up with a lot more clarity on what they are proposing. Looks like 6 regions. They name the groups of schools they propose in each region. This would all take effect in Fall 2027, so applications to high school program by region would be for the newly rising 7th graders.

I’d have a lot of questions if I had a rising 8th grader who may or may not have access to the old high school program options, but probably not the new options but may also have different home school assignments for 9th and 10th depending on the boundary changes.

Link?

https://go.boarddocs.com/mabe/mcpsmd/Board.nsf/files/DHUTPZ7866CF/$file/Program%20Analysis%20Boundary%20Studies%20Update%20250624%20PPT.pdf

Anonymous wrote:Board docs are up with a lot more clarity on what they are proposing. Looks like 6 regions. They name the groups of schools they propose in each region. This would all take effect in Fall 2027, so applications to high school program by region would be for the newly rising 7th graders.

I’d have a lot of questions if I had a rising 8th grader who may or may not have access to the old high school program options, but probably not the new options but may also have different home school assignments for 9th and 10th depending on the boundary changes.

Link?

Board docs are up with a lot more clarity on what they are proposing. Looks like 6 regions. They name the groups of schools they propose in each region. This would all take effect in Fall 2027, so applications to high school program by region would be for the newly rising 7th graders.

I’d have a lot of questions if I had a rising 8th grader who may or may not have access to the old high school program options, but probably not the new options but may also have different home school assignments for 9th and 10th depending on the boundary changes.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:ETA: and the Blair and RM parents who are complaining about the quality of the program declining if it becomes regional are horrible snobs. Your gifted kid can learn with other gifted local kids! They don’t have to be with only gifted kids from all around the whole county! Give me a break. So snobby!

Is MOP snobby?

The quality of the program would definitely decline if, instead of taking top 100 kids it took the top 1000. It’s already a very tough, challenging program that only the top third or so truly excel in. Expanding without reducing the standards will just set some kids up for failure or more likely dilute the program.

You're assuming that the 100 kids in the program are the top and would forever be. You are also assume there is not another 900 kids who could/would succeed in such program if the seats and program structure were available.

Anonymous wrote:They really need to slow this down. They are proposing major changes on a fast timeline without opportunity for public input.

They aren't. There has already been a survey sent out and extended. There is also Implementation and Communication planned from July through November.