Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:FYI - the original link posted in the OP is broken. There is a revised PPT and new document on budget and transportation posted in the BOE agenda for today which can be accessed here: https://go.boarddocs.com/mabe/mcpsmd/Board.nsf/goto?open&id=DJMGHC43C32B

Yet they still have the creepy AI images of the students of color who have warped faces when you zoom in.

Here is the link to the presentation: https://go.boarddocs.com/mabe/mcpsmd/Board.nsf/files/DNLJE34CC316/$file/Boundary%20Studies%20Program%20Analysis%20Update%20251120%20PPT%20REV.pdf

And to the budget: https://go.boarddocs.com/mabe/mcpsmd/Board.nsf/files/DNLJXC4F4A19/$file/Regional%20Program%20Model%20FY2027-2031%20Budget%20251120.pdf

Save them now before they take them down.

OMG and the messaging on those slides is just awful. Very tokenistic, and a disingenuous and offensive use of BIPOC kids, even creepy AI kids.

Anonymous wrote:FYI - the original link posted in the OP is broken. There is a revised PPT and new document on budget and transportation posted in the BOE agenda for today which can be accessed here: https://go.boarddocs.com/mabe/mcpsmd/Board.nsf/goto?open&id=DJMGHC43C32B

Yet they still have the creepy AI images of the students of color who have warped faces when you zoom in.

Here is the link to the presentation: https://go.boarddocs.com/mabe/mcpsmd/Board.nsf/files/DNLJE34CC316/$file/Boundary%20Studies%20Program%20Analysis%20Update%20251120%20PPT%20REV.pdf

And to the budget: https://go.boarddocs.com/mabe/mcpsmd/Board.nsf/files/DNLJXC4F4A19/$file/Regional%20Program%20Model%20FY2027-2031%20Budget%20251120.pdf

Save them now before they take them down.

Anonymous wrote:So looking at the budget document, by the time this is fully rolled out in 2030-2031. Einstein will have 980 total kids in their programs, 600 not local. This is for a high school that will be downsized to 1500 total kids by then. Crazy numbers here.

That is absolutely silly. These types of examples are why everyone is saying slow down to get it right because this is clearly not getting it right.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:In the meeting at Flora Singer this week Taylor said the DCC was a good idea but its “flaw” was not including the “white, wealthy schools.” I’m not sure what he thought he was achieving by sharing that perspective, other than saying the quiet part out loud as is clear from this entire process.

That blew my mind when he said that. Then claiming that placing the IB magnet at BCC was to help diversify it. FFS man, read the room.

Didn't the Metis report reach essentially that same conclusion about the DCC's flaw?

yes

So yes and no.

The report states at one point:

Another key decision made by Board at the time of the development of each consortium was to opt against including high schools with higher proportions of White students and students who were not eligible for FARMS―namely Sherwood HS in the NEC and Bethesda-Chevy Chase HS in the DCC. Without these schools, the student population across each consortium was not as diverse, in terms as race, ethnicity, or socioeconomics. These decisions, thus constrained the potential for the consortia to promote diversity; and the impact of the decisions has been magnified over time with shifts in enrollment and diversity across the consortia.

But it also says:

Even though the consortia were designed to increase racial, ethnic, and socioeconomic diversity across the schools, the current school enrollments are demographically very similar to the schools’ base areas. When established, the high school consortia were each designed to create greater racial, ethnic, and socioeconomic diversity across the participating schools. However, student enrollment across the consortia regions, as discussed in the context section of the report, has increased substantially in the past decades.

https://www.montgomeryschoolsmd.org/siteassets/district/info/choice/choicestudyreport-version2-20160307.pdf

So I'm not sure what the value is of including wealthy white schools if we know it doesn't increase diversity. I think it will do just the opposite.

Anonymous wrote:The budget document is incomprehensible. And I thought this was all about equity. How is it equitable to give all of the program schools the same exact field trip budget when Whitman and Churchill have PTSAs and Foundations that can supplement field trip budgets and Watkins Mill and Kennedy don't have those resources?

https://go.boarddocs.com/mabe/mcpsmd/Board.nsf/files/DNLJXC4F4A19/$file/Regional%20Program%20Model%20FY2027-2031%20Budget%20251120.pdf

That is the craziest budget document I've ever seen. No rationale or substantiation. Just creative math.

But putting that aside, these costs are just for the regional program and it gets really pricey once you get all the way out to the FY 2031 year. So how the hell is MCPS supposed to sustain that?

Not to mention, how will MCPS pay for this AND simultaneously run current programming as they promised the public? What's the cost of doing both of those things concurrently?

My guess is even if they didn't do local set asides, Whitman and BCC students would still occupy more than their "fair share" given there is a larger share (still a minority) of academically advanced students at these schools compared to Einstein and Northwood (Blair is obviously different due to SMCS and CAP). That's probably why they are placing those programs there. I get their reasoning - why should those students have to travel to access programs. The issue I have with this reasoning is that they are assuming a need that isn't there - these academically advanced students are currently well served with lots of AP classes and their own engineering programs. They don't need to bring in more academically advanced kids from Einstein and Northwood.

The budget document is incomprehensible. And I thought this was all about equity. How is it equitable to give all of the program schools the same exact field trip budget when Whitman and Churchill have PTSAs and Foundations that can supplement field trip budgets and Watkins Mill and Kennedy don't have those resources?

https://go.boarddocs.com/mabe/mcpsmd/Board.nsf/files/DNLJXC4F4A19/$file/Regional%20Program%20Model%20FY2027-2031%20Budget%20251120.pdf

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Here's the ppt
Boundary Studies Program Analysis Update 251120 PPT.pdf https://share.google/M0lQdbx2jTMlewfP9

They seem to be frantically adding programs to address concerns. BCC now getting an interest based engineering program so they can siphon off more wealthy students from Einstein and Northwood, so awesome.

Northwood still screwed. People complained about it not having an academic criteria-based program and so they added.... agroecology, whatever the heck that is?

Meanwhile Whitman still has a criteria-based humanities magnet and BCC still has a criteria-based IB magnet, and they are doubling down on local schools getting extra local set-aside seats (as many as twice their fair share, ie. 15 compared to 30 shared among the other 4 schools or 25 compared to 60 shared among the other 4 schools.). So a humanities kid from the DCC not only has to travel all the way go BCC or Whitman for a magnet, but the BCC and Whitman kids have a much higher chance of getting in.

SMH. This is all so terribly inequitable.

Racist, even. Segregation 2.0

Where is the Black and Brown coalition when you need them?

Too busy bending over backwards to carry water for Taylor.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:In the meeting at Flora Singer this week Taylor said the DCC was a good idea but its “flaw” was not including the “white, wealthy schools.” I’m not sure what he thought he was achieving by sharing that perspective, other than saying the quiet part out loud as is clear from this entire process.

That blew my mind when he said that. Then claiming that placing the IB magnet at BCC was to help diversify it. FFS man, read the room.

Taylor is so full of shit. In the new presentation, MCPS says there will be 30 – 60 Regional seats and 15 – 25 Local seats in the criteria based programs like IB. Even if most of those seats don’t go to rich, white kids from Whitman, those numbers won’t shift any demographics significantly.

The perception is that 3/4ths of the non local seats would go to schools that are “less wealthy” “more diverse” DCC schools. The reality is the actual kids likely to come from those “less wealthy” “more diverse” schools for this program are probably the ones who are demographically and economically similar to the BCC kids.

Not necessarily demographically, but economically, absolutely. You expect well-resourced Black and Hispanic families to take advantage of the programs to send their kids to the Bethesda schools. And honestly, you can't blame those parents given how poorly managed the DCC schools are.

So looking at the budget document, by the time this is fully rolled out in 2030-2031. Einstein will have 980 total kids in their programs, 600 not local. This is for a high school that will be downsized to 1500 total kids by then. Crazy numbers here.

Lots of talk about serving the very top of the top students. What about the bulk of college-bound students who are bright and capable, but won't qualify for the most competitive programs? Why do they always fall by the wayside when they make up the majority of students?

it is HILARIOUS that they assume 100 students from Whitman will be traveling anywhere. They will be staying at their home school where they can access advanced math, science and humanities with transportation from their neighborhoods.

FYI - the original link posted in the OP is broken. There is a revised PPT and new document on budget and transportation posted in the BOE agenda for today which can be accessed here: https://go.boarddocs.com/mabe/mcpsmd/Board.nsf/goto?open&id=DJMGHC43C32B

They added a document with estimated seats for each program, staffing, and transportation.

The transportation still appears as though you’ll need to get your own transportation to your high school early in order to get on the special program bus based on the very limited number of buses they seem to think they will need.

I think their math there is VERY suspicious. They are subtracting bus riders from local school counts, assuming special program kids won’t need service to their local school. But that doesn’t make sense. If a handful of kids from my neighborhood go to regional programs, they’re not just going to eliminate our neighborhood’s bus for the other students. You might find a few efficiencies but not enough to eliminate multiple neighborhood bus routes.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Here's the ppt
Boundary Studies Program Analysis Update 251120 PPT.pdf https://share.google/M0lQdbx2jTMlewfP9

They seem to be frantically adding programs to address concerns. BCC now getting an interest based engineering program so they can siphon off more wealthy students from Einstein and Northwood, so awesome.

And, yet, they aren't giving many slots. Einstein familes (and now Northwood) have always been the forgotten school - no renovations, no advanced classes, few clubs...

I suspect they are doing it at Einstein as they aready have the classes so it looks like they are getting something new when they aren't. Einstein only has one engineering teacher who teaches a combine two classes in one in one class period class and that's it (great teacher but stretched thin as that's not fair to anyone). How MCPS thinks this is ok is beyond me!

Isn't Einstein getting a new criteria based Biotech program, a new interet based health care program, the criteria based visual arts for the region, the criteria based music for the region plus IB?

The biotech program will be a glorified lab tech training program.

https://marylandpublicschools.org/programs/documents/cte/standards/hhs_biotechnology-a.pdf

Umm what role do you think as HS student would qualify for beyond a glorified lab tech??? That alone doesn’t mean they can’t create a program that exposes kids to research, science and the opportunities to explore biotechnology.

I have my issues with how this is going but I think you’re barking up the wrong tree.

Compare that curriculum to the ones for the STEM programs at Blair and Poolesville. Are they even remotely similar? No. MCPS is developing direct-entry career pathways and trying to sell them as advanced college prep programs. It’s dishonest and parents are going to be pissed when it turns out their kid isn’t in a pre-pre-med track, but a track to work an entry-level job at LabCorp.


https://old.mbhs.edu/departments/magnet/courses.php

https://docs.google.com/document/d/1wOQxSa4R9M18B0DT0JrSnBFs50XKe0QGXa36rw5xIkU/edit?tab=t.0

🙄 a pre-pre-med track. You mean HS.

There is no such thing as a pre-pre-med track. That’s made up. Premed is the set of classes that must show in a collegiate level transcript to qualify for medical school application. That’s it.

Agree. Region 1 already has the Blair STEM magnet if you want to go that route. It's perfectly fine to put this sort of biotech program at another school in the same region.

The Blair magnet isn’t a life sciences program. The Wheaton biomedical magnet is the life sciences program for the DCC, and the teacher just won a national award from the organization that developed the curriculum. Region 3 should be super excited to gain access to that magnet.

In the new Region 1, the only life sciences option will be this biotechnology pathway. Unless MCPS delivers a whole lot of AP and IB science courses as electives (which Einstein doesn’t currently offer), it will just be a handful of classes on how to use a pipette and a microscope.

Would you get on a bus from Whitman for that?

But doesn't the fact that MCPS is placing biotech in Einstein suggest that it will be adding the AP science classes to Einstein that are needed there?

Dunno. People keep asking about stuff like that and MCPS never answers.

From one of the previous presentations they gave an outline of the proposed biomedical program at Rockville and it listed IB science, not AP. It listed "HL" IB classes - HL stands for "higher level" vs "SL" which is "standard level". But it's a different approach from AP classes. I think they are proposing the biomedical/biotech program for Einstein to try to bolster the local IB program so I doubt they plan to add APs.