Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

Doesn't look that bad to me given nearly all the students receive farms

That's fair, but if you're a region 5 parent with a high achieving child, are you sending them to an IB program where only 17% of students are passing the IB math exam?

Only 40% of MCPS seniors graduate proficient in math. This is the school system we all send our kids to. Those with education/resources see when our kids are failing and help our kids either ourselves or hire tutors.

And instead of addressing this fact, MCPS is squandering resources patching together 100 regional HS programs with homemade curriculum and an inequitable transportation plan that requires students to travel to home high schools to catch a bus to their regional high school, something that will greatly depress regional program sign-ups. We have wasted too many resources on this already.

But this is not a fact.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

Doesn't look that bad to me given nearly all the students receive farms

That's fair, but if you're a region 5 parent with a high achieving child, are you sending them to an IB program where only 17% of students are passing the IB math exam?

Only 40% of MCPS seniors graduate proficient in math. This is the school system we all send our kids to. Those with education/resources see when our kids are failing and help our kids either ourselves or hire tutors.

Wrong

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

No, MCCPTA has two delegates from each school in the county eligible to vote on key matters, such as the regional programs. That's real representation. MCCPTA sent out a draft resolution on slowing the implementation of regional programs to help ensure quality, and all schools had the ability to discuss the issues. Delegates voted on this. If your delegates didn't present the issue, then I would suggest that you volunteer to do the hard work of community organizing, instead of mouthing off on an anonymous website.

If you believe that each school has two delegates represented on MCCPTA and ones actively participating then I have a bridge I want to sell you. There are schools in the county that don’t even have functioning PTAs and some with barely enough people willing to serve on the board.

That's because they are all unpaid volunteers who stand nothing to gain personally from sucking up to Thomas Taylor, unlike every single individual that has spoken publicly in favor of the regional model.

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

Depends how you define successful.

The data on outcomes I saw - a) # of students taking the IB exams and b) the % of students passing (demonstrating proficiency on) IB exams - it was only RMIB and BCC that had high numbers. All the other schools performance were dismal.

But MCPS Jeannie Franklin defined regional IB success as # of Black and Brown students in the program.

So you do you.

Were you looking at data for RM IB and BCC IB program pass rates in their early years?

Anonymous wrote:

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.

No, MCCPTA has two delegates from each school in the county eligible to vote on key matters, such as the regional programs. That's real representation. MCCPTA sent out a draft resolution on slowing the implementation of regional programs to help ensure quality, and all schools had the ability to discuss the issues. Delegates voted on this. If your delegates didn't present the issue, then I would suggest that you volunteer to do the hard work of community organizing, instead of mouthing off on an anonymous website.

If you believe that each school has two delegates represented on MCCPTA and ones actively participating then I have a bridge I want to sell you. There are schools in the county that don’t even have functioning PTAs and some with barely enough people willing to serve on the board.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

Doesn't look that bad to me given nearly all the students receive farms

That's fair, but if you're a region 5 parent with a high achieving child, are you sending them to an IB program where only 17% of students are passing the IB math exam?

Only 40% of MCPS seniors graduate proficient in math. This is the school system we all send our kids to. Those with education/resources see when our kids are failing and help our kids either ourselves or hire tutors.

I had always wondered how high school proficiency rates "improved" after middle school proficiency rates that were even lower.

I recently learned that a number of Special Education students are no longer given MAP-M once they finish algebra 1. So that will explain (at least in part) why there is a bump up in the aggregate math proficiency rates at the high school level.

So no, it's not MCPS teaching our kids math. It's just keeping out some of the lowest-performing students from taking the test so that the overall rate can be higher.

They don't do MAP anymore in HS in the higher grades. There really is no need.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

Doesn't look that bad to me given nearly all the students receive farms

That's fair, but if you're a region 5 parent with a high achieving child, are you sending them to an IB program where only 17% of students are passing the IB math exam?

And MCPS has no plans in place to improve those math outcomes. Somehow, dispersing RMIB students to attend their home schools or a new regional school program is supposed to somehow improve outcomes at lower performing regional IB programs.

Region 5 currently sends about 10 kids a year to RMIB. Even if they all go to Watkins Mill instead, it's not changing outcomes.

I do not think the goal of this regional model is for rich kids to go to poor schools and lift them up or whatever. They certainly haven't designed it to do that.

The goal is to do changes for the sake of changes to say they did something. The theory is that they can pull the smarter kids out of the poorer schools and brag about that while ignoing that plan also creates a greater divide and sets up more schools to decline.

Anonymous wrote:

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

Depends how you define successful.

The data on outcomes I saw - a) # of students taking the IB exams and b) the % of students passing (demonstrating proficiency on) IB exams - it was only RMIB and BCC that had high numbers. All the other schools performance were dismal.

But MCPS Jeannie Franklin defined regional IB success as # of Black and Brown students in the program.

So you do you.

Well I mean MCPS doesn't do well educating Black and Brown students. The RM and BCC IB programs don't serve many Black and Brown students. The programs serve different populations. Are the RM and BCC programs that great or do they just have the right students in them? Btw more than 30% of students at BCC get below a 3 on the math IB exam

MCPS is very teacher-specific and there is no quality control. They don't do well at educating most kids and you really need to supplement at home. The Black and Brown Colliation, MCCPTA (a lot of, not all), NAACP, have their kids at the wealthier schools and probably supplement outside and have no idea what it's like for other families. MCCPTA is not open to listening to ideas from anyone else and will use your discussion to convince you why you are wrong vs. supporting your concerns. They completely miss the mark.

Anonymous wrote:

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

Depends how you define successful.

The data on outcomes I saw - a) # of students taking the IB exams and b) the % of students passing (demonstrating proficiency on) IB exams - it was only RMIB and BCC that had high numbers. All the other schools performance were dismal.

But MCPS Jeannie Franklin defined regional IB success as # of Black and Brown students in the program.

So you do you.

Well I mean MCPS doesn't do well educating Black and Brown students. The RM and BCC IB programs don't serve many Black and Brown students. The programs serve different populations. Are the RM and BCC programs that great or do they just have the right students in them? Btw more than 30% of students at BCC get below a 3 on the math IB exam

Both. The programs are great, but even a great program would not produce these outcomes with a different set of students.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

Doesn't look that bad to me given nearly all the students receive farms

That's fair, but if you're a region 5 parent with a high achieving child, are you sending them to an IB program where only 17% of students are passing the IB math exam?

And MCPS has no plans in place to improve those math outcomes. Somehow, dispersing RMIB students to attend their home schools or a new regional school program is supposed to somehow improve outcomes at lower performing regional IB programs.

Region 5 currently sends about 10 kids a year to RMIB. Even if they all go to Watkins Mill instead, it's not changing outcomes.

I do not think the goal of this regional model is for rich kids to go to poor schools and lift them up or whatever. They certainly haven't designed it to do that.

Ding ding ding! You have hit on the issue! No one knows what the goal of this whole charade is. Is it to lift up underperforming schools? Is it to meet blueprint requirements? Is it to reduce transportation time? Is it to increase seats in programs? Is it to sneakily dismantle the DCC and NEC while pretending to offer an alternative? Is it to better serve high performers in schools that have mostly underperforming populations? Is it to increase diversity? Everyone is coming up with assumptions about the goal, but MCPS skipped the analysis part of what is/isn’t working and put forth a “solution” without identifying the problem. So without a clear goal, and without a clear plan to ensure the plan meets the goal, they are just throwing spaghetti at the wall hoping something will stick.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

Doesn't look that bad to me given nearly all the students receive farms

That's fair, but if you're a region 5 parent with a high achieving child, are you sending them to an IB program where only 17% of students are passing the IB math exam?

And MCPS has no plans in place to improve those math outcomes. Somehow, dispersing RMIB students to attend their home schools or a new regional school program is supposed to somehow improve outcomes at lower performing regional IB programs.

Region 5 currently sends about 10 kids a year to RMIB. Even if they all go to Watkins Mill instead, it's not changing outcomes.

I do not think the goal of this regional model is for rich kids to go to poor schools and lift them up or whatever. They certainly haven't designed it to do that.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

Doesn't look that bad to me given nearly all the students receive farms

That's fair, but if you're a region 5 parent with a high achieving child, are you sending them to an IB program where only 17% of students are passing the IB math exam?

And MCPS has no plans in place to improve those math outcomes. Somehow, dispersing RMIB students to attend their home schools or a new regional school program is supposed to somehow improve outcomes at lower performing regional IB programs.

Region 5 currently sends about 10 kids a year to RMIB. Even if they all go to Watkins Mill instead, it's not changing outcomes.

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

Depends how you define successful.

The data on outcomes I saw - a) # of students taking the IB exams and b) the % of students passing (demonstrating proficiency on) IB exams - it was only RMIB and BCC that had high numbers. All the other schools performance were dismal.

But MCPS Jeannie Franklin defined regional IB success as # of Black and Brown students in the program.

So you do you.

Well I mean MCPS doesn't do well educating Black and Brown students. The RM and BCC IB programs don't serve many Black and Brown students. The programs serve different populations. Are the RM and BCC programs that great or do they just have the right students in them? Btw more than 30% of students at BCC get below a 3 on the math IB exam

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

Doesn't look that bad to me given nearly all the students receive farms

That's fair, but if you're a region 5 parent with a high achieving child, are you sending them to an IB program where only 17% of students are passing the IB math exam?

Only 40% of MCPS seniors graduate proficient in math. This is the school system we all send our kids to. Those with education/resources see when our kids are failing and help our kids either ourselves or hire tutors.

I had always wondered how high school proficiency rates "improved" after middle school proficiency rates that were even lower.

I recently learned that a number of Special Education students are no longer given MAP-M once they finish algebra 1. So that will explain (at least in part) why there is a bump up in the aggregate math proficiency rates at the high school level.

So no, it's not MCPS teaching our kids math. It's just keeping out some of the lowest-performing students from taking the test so that the overall rate can be higher.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

Doesn't look that bad to me given nearly all the students receive farms

That's fair, but if you're a region 5 parent with a high achieving child, are you sending them to an IB program where only 17% of students are passing the IB math exam?

Only 40% of MCPS seniors graduate proficient in math. This is the school system we all send our kids to. Those with education/resources see when our kids are failing and help our kids either ourselves or hire tutors.

And instead of addressing this fact, MCPS is squandering resources patching together 100 regional HS programs with homemade curriculum and an inequitable transportation plan that requires students to travel to home high schools to catch a bus to their regional high school, something that will greatly depress regional program sign-ups. We have wasted too many resources on this already.