. Buenas tardes. My name is Grace Rivera, and I'm the president of the Board of Education. And I represent district one. Welcome to our board members. M.C.P.S. staff and members of our community who are joining us here today. And to those who are watching this meeting via
live stream. Hola, mami. Sending you a big hug. Let us begin by standing for the Pledge of Allegiance. The flag is in the back. I pledge allegiance to the flag. The United States of America and to the Republic for which it
stands. One nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. Thank you. I will now ask my colleagues to please introduce themselves to establish a quorum. I will start on my right. Good
afternoon, Laura Stewart in district four. Buenas tardes. Good afternoon. Karla Silvestre, school board member at large. Good afternoon, Julie Yang, district three. Good afternoon, Brenda Wolff, district five. Good afternoon. Rita montoya, board member at large. Good
afternoon, Natalie Zimmerman. I represent district two. Good afternoon. Malu, student member of the board. Thank you. Is there a motion to approve the revised agenda? Motion to approve. Second. All those in favor, please raise your hand.
Thank you. That's unanimous. Next, is there a motion to approve items 3.2 and 3.3? Motion to approve. Second. All those in favor, please raise
your hands. And that is unanimous. The next item on the agenda is recommendations of appointments by Doctor Taylor. Thank you, Madam President. We have two individuals for consideration for administrative appointments, as I call your name, and say a
couple of things about you. If you could please stand and the board will consider your recommendation. And then we'll celebrate your appointment. Good. Willing. So first for consideration is Mr. Keith, a Sutton for the position of director of the Department of
System Wide Equity in the Division of Equity and Organizational Development. Mr. Sutton brings to M.C.P.S. years of educational policy and advocacy experience as a former Board of Education member in North Carolina and a former superintendent. He is excited
to join team M.C.P.S. and to become a Maryland resident. Shout outs to his daughters Alexia and Michaela. Motion to approve. I second the motion. All those in favor, please say aye. All those in favor, please raise your hands. And that is
unanimous. Congratulations. Welcome to Maryland. Next is a familiar face to team M.c.p.s. Doctor Tamara K Hewlett for the position of director of Curriculum Development and Instruction in the Division of
Teaching and Learning. Doctor Hewlett has been with Montgomery County Public Schools for 22 years as a teacher, staff development teacher, instructional specialist, curriculum Specialist, coordinator, supervisor and Director and most recently as the Acting Director. In this role, she
looks forward to continuing her work with intention on behalf of the students of M.c.p.s. Alongside her team and robust curriculum group shout outs to her husband IRA, her children Zaire, Zion and Zen, her mother
Evelyn, and her sister Tanya. Doctor Hewlett would also like to thank the leaders and colleagues and friends that continue to support her as a leader in M.c.p.s. And a special shout out to the leaders of the Division of Teaching and Learning that are here today in the boardroom, in addition to the members of her
team who are watching online. Thank you. Motion to approve I second the motion. All those in favor, please raise your hands. And that is unanimous. Congratulations. Thank you,
Madam President. This concludes administrative appointments for today. Thank you so much, Doctor Taylor. The next item on the agenda is association comments. I will ask if there are any designated designated representatives to please
provide your comments. So please come forward. Okay. Seeing none, then I'm going to move to item number six. This is our public comment. The next
item is public comment. While the board encourages public input on policy, program and practices and will consider the comments received, it is not the board's practice during this public meetings to respond to questions, provide comments or take actions on the issues
raised. This is a public meeting and the board expects the conduct of all speakers and members of the audience to be within the bounds of proper etiquette, inappropriate personal remarks, rude retorts, or other such behavior is out
of order and will not be tolerated. Those who demonstrate disruptive or disrespectful behavior during our public comment may be asked to leave the room. In addition, public comment is not the proper avenue to address a
specific student or employee matters. Such matters should be directed through the complaint or appeal process. Each speaker has two minutes to deliver comments. When your name is called, press the button and speak clearly into the
microphone. A yellow light and single beep indicates you have 30s remaining. A red light and repeating beep signals the time has expired. Once you have finished speaking, press the same button to turn off the
microphone. Following live testimony, audio and video testimony will be played. Copies of testimonies are posted with the other materials for this meeting on board docs. With that, I'm going to call the next six names. If you can,
please come forward once you hear your name. Ananya Sharma, Sumedha Sharma, Haley Duckworth, Claire Mata, Nicholas Federico,
Rebecca Jacobs. If we can start with Ananya, please. Good afternoon, Doctor Taylor and members of the board. As a junior at Wooton High School, I
come here to confidently say that option H is not the way to go. Wooten is a proactive and tight knit community. From the athletic teams to the arts programs, each students finds their own place in the school and the building is part of that. The cohesive society we have now would take years to rebuild. If the students are
transferred to another location with overcrowded classes, longer commute time and friends that live farther away. The 27% of students that currently walk to Wooton every day will also need to find a new way to commute to to Crown. Yes, the students have been asking for improvements for a long time, but we didn't ask to be
completely uprooted from the site itself. We have a perfectly good school right here, which just needs a bit of TLC. While I see the appeal of a better, newer building, I think that using Crown as a holding school will be a better option than using Wooten. The Wooten building is still old, and putting students that are in renovating buildings like
Magruder into Wooten is like jumping out of the frying pan and into the fire. Students can instead go to Crown to wait out the renovations, the renovations, and enjoy the nicer and newer building and the time and resources that will be put into renovating, into getting ready to be a holding school can instead be put into renovating Wooten, and
the environment around the school is also used by the students. We have a walking and running trail right across the street that bikers, walkers and athletic teams use, and the school is close to Frost Lakewood and Falls Mead, and students from each school can attend events at other schools and easily pick up their siblings. Although I will
graduate before H is implemented, I do have a little sibling, as a lot of my peers do, and I want to be able to talk to her about my old teachers classrooms and continue contributing to the school after I graduate. I urge the board to reject option H and pursue plans instead to renovate Wooten, ultimately
providing a real solution to the students and the community. Thank you. Thank you Samita. Good afternoon board members and Doctor Taylor. I am Sunita Sharma, a student of M.c.p.s.
So just last year I got accepted to attend the magnet program at Parkland Middle School, which is just outside of the Wooten High School District that I reside right next to on Wooten Parkway. Making the commute every single day is hard, and there's always worry that I might miss the bus and have to have my parents drop me to school, causing my
parents to be late to work and therefore have to work overtime. I will not be attending parkland next year. I will be switching to Robert Frost Middle School so I can reach there easier and have more opportunities for after school activities and making friends that will stay with me as I go to boot. In the following years, I was looking forward to all of
the academic and extracurricular experiences my neighborhood school would offer. However, if option H is chosen, not only will I not have the exceptional school of Wooten to go to the same situation with community parkland, every day will repeat itself with Crown. As a student in Parkland Middle School, I am interested in band and art. I wanted to continue
playing my instrument in Robert Frost after the switch, which is going to happen, and then play in the marching band at Wooten. Since my older sister goes to Wuhan and will have graduated by the time I'm there, she would be able to tell me where to start, and I wouldn't be able to be completely helpless in getting situated in Crown. I assume everything
would be different and more difficult when I tried to join art clubs or whatever sort of band class they have there. I don't want things to be confusing or hard when I go to school, so I would hope that you would give me the opportunity to safely and ethically have a good education at Wooten, right where it's supposed to be on Wooten
Parkway. Thank you. Doctor Stallworth. Hello everyone. My name is Haley Duckworth and I am in third grade at Fields Road Elementary School. I've been going to the school since
since I was in kindergarten. I really love my school. I love my teachers because they make learning fun and they care about us. I also love visiting Miss Raffo's room because she makes me. She makes makes us feel safe, supported and confident. She's our family and
her encouragement specialist. She helps our school grow stronger every day. Please keep miss Raffo at our school. We need her. I need I love recess because I get to play with my friends, and I love art because
I get to draw whatever's in my imagination. My principal, Doctor Williams, is doing a great job improving our school. I want to go to Crown High School so I can walk to school with my friends. I hope they have a nice art studio. I want
to be in a school that has enough rooms for students to learn and it is not overcrowded. We promise this school so please don't lock us out of our neighborhood school. I know you're busy and you have a lot of big decisions to make. I
think it's important for kids to share their wishes. We are young, but we are watching, listening, and noticing the decisions you made. Thank you. Thank you. Hayley. Miss Mata.
Good afternoon, members of the board and Doctor Taylor. My name is Claire Mata, a Wooten alum and parent. I urge you to reject option H. Trust is the currency of a public school system. Families accept difficult decisions when the
process is fair and transparent. When that trust erodes, families disengage and once disengaged, they don't come back. M.C.P.S. own data already shows more families moving to homeschooling and private
options. The direction is clear confidence in public institutions is fragile. When families see long standing schools treated as stopgap answers to facilities problems, when their advocacy is ignored, when communities are blindsided
right before the holidays, when recommendations are made without meeting the affected community, families opt out. This isn't just a theoretical loss. It is a fiscal catastrophe. Every student who
opts out takes over $20,000 in state and local funding, with them closing. Wooten sets a chilling precedent. If decades of deferred investment justify eliminating a school rather than modernizing it, then no school. Not Sims, not Magruder,
not Damascus is safe. In December, you adopted an amendment for the Sims community. You recognize that a budget vote is not a closure vote, and closing a school must follow a stand alone, transparent legal process. You
acknowledge that five weeks was insufficient for meaningful community engagement. We demand that same equity of process for the Wooten community. Reject option H, decouple our boundaries from your budget and honor our trust in your
stewardship of M.c.p.s. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Federico. My name is Nick Federico. I'm a cold spring parent to two girls, Doctor Taylor and board members.
Thank you for the additional opportunity to be heard today. Like many others here, I'm testifying to objectively explain why the board should vote against H. I live on the border of three different school boundaries for high school, and in one of the furthest communities from Crown. So option H will particularly
affect my community because it will ensure another boundary study will have to take place in the future. H is ignoring a factor of geographic proximity and adds unnecessary logistical and geographic barriers for many Wooton High School students, H disrupts
neighborhood feeder patterns, shifting a community school miles away from me to a different city. I, like many others, chose to live in an established community with a local high school to avoid commutes so my children could meaningfully participate in extracurricular activities and athletic pursuits, and so I
could be active in my children's school experiences. My wife and I work in Washington, D.C. and the prospect of a longer commute to pick up our kids after extracurricular activities in Gaithersburg is daunting. And when my youngest is in middle school at Cabin John in Potomac, we will have to drive even
further south from our home, then all the way back up to 70 to Gaithersburg. This disruption feels especially unnecessary given the fact that other, more reasonable and less disruptive options exist. H also creates boundary instability, leaving the potential for future overcrowding and future boundary reassignments. H
creates boundary instability. Even though FAA policy aims to minimize disruption and preserve community integrity wherever possible, H reduces capacity in a high growth area. And leaving it more likely to be reassigned in the future. As
since I'm on the edge of three high school boundaries, reducing capacity will make Wooton inevitably overcrowded in the future. H creates future overcrowding issues by permanently reducing this capacity in the Rockville Gaithersburg high growth corridor, all in the name of cost savings. But growth in
this area will continue to eclipse growth across the county as a whole, leaving Crown inevitably overcrowded. Thank you for your testimony. Appreciate it, Miss Jacobs. In
2015, Wooton was on the CIP. Think about how much has changed in the last decade. Maybe you got married. Welcome to grandchild, lost a loved one, faced a health scare, endured a global pandemic. Ten years ago. My own son was a first grader. He's 17, almost ready to leave home. Life has moved forward,
but Wooton has been frozen in time and the CIP is gone. In the last ten years, Wootton has deteriorated dramatically. The FCA uses the phrase poor condition 40 times. Our electrical systems cause power outages during construction. The leaky roof creates slippery
stairs. Active mold grows in our locker rooms. The building fails. Ada compliance. We need help, not a further burden. Some people are afraid to name these conditions, fearing it will push option H and close our school. I am not because
option H does not help our community or our school system. Option H does not help because our region needs more enrollment capacity, not less. Rockville region is exploding. Mbia warned that option H would reduce high school capacity in a growth area and fail to meet
future housing demand. Wootton is worth fixing as a standalone school because why would M.c.p.s. Pour tens of millions of dollars into option H just to use Wootton as a temporary holding school when that money can fix it permanently? Option H is the most expensive Wootton
is worth saving for its countywide autism program. Nationally ranked a cappella group and strong Stem outcomes all achieved despite unusable science labs and failing infrastructure. Fix the building and you strengthen a resource for students across
M.c.p.s. We have been mischaracterized as angry, but what you hear in our voice is grief. Grief for ten years of waiting, of broken promises and grief over the possibility of a school closure to our Crown neighbors. I am so sorry that
you may need to wait. We truly, truly understand. We've been waiting too. Thank you, Miss Jacobs, we have your testimony. I'm going to be calling the next six speakers. If you hear your name, please come. Come forward. Joseph. Asphalt.
Theodora. Jihadi. Bisbee. Mick. Herkner. Janusz Sharma, and
Sherry Liu. Mr. If you can start, please. Thank you. Good afternoon. Members of the board and Mr. Taylor, today I want to address the fundamental erosion of the social and fiscal
contract between this county and its residents. Number of areas. Number one, we're being asked to support a plan that is fiscally backwards at a time when capital budgets are strained, we're proposing to move students away from existing walkable infrastructure into busses,
increasing long term operational costs for transportation in perpetuity. Simply to solve a short term utilization puzzle is not fiscal stewardship. It's a recurring tax on our future. Number two, if you visit the Think Moco website today, Montgomery County explicitly
promises and advertises walkable, sustainable communities. We believed in that promise. Yet option H contradicts this by intentionally walking our students beyond the commute. One serves as a vital community center for the surrounding neighborhoods, taking children who currently walk to their local school and placing them
on busses severs the physical tie between the school and the community it anchors. This regression ignores your own criteria for environmental and community stability. Option H number three is a knee jerk reaction based on incomplete data. It ignores the most recent planned developments and
will only exacerbate the crowding. The board aims to be resolving. Even concerning is the fact that this option has failed to factor in massive long term budgetary impacts of its own design. Number four trust in leadership is built on
predictability. For years, the promise made to the Crown community was clear. Crown was built for Crown families moved there with the explicit understanding that their community would be served by the infrastructure designed for it. In conclusion, stability is
not about how long a child stays in one building, it is about the stability of the promise the board makes to its citizens. I urge you to reject option H. It increases bussing, driving, decreases walkability, and fails the test of fiscal common sense. Thank you. Thank
you, Mrs. Carrato. Good afternoon. I presented at the American Public Health Association recently on a pattern exemplified in Montgomery County. Cell towers are disproportionately placed on schools serving lower income families. It's time for a
change. Children deserve safe learning environments. School boards nationwide have banned new cell towers at schools, from Los Angeles to Palo Alto to Loudoun County. I request that the board overhaul its current unsafe, deficient and nontransparent cell tower
leasing and oversight process. In the US, the government allows RF radiation from cell towers 10 to 100 times higher than several other countries. Why? Because federal limits have not been updated since 1996, and they only protect for short term heating, not cancer
or effects to the brain, reproductive or immune system reported in numerous credible scientific studies. I sued the US government on this, and in 2021, a federal court ordered the FCC to explain how its RF radiation limits adequately protect the public, especially
children, from long term exposure. It's been nearly five years in the FCC has failed to respond to the court order in our case, given this regulatory failure, school boards must step up. New cell towers must be prohibited, and stronger
oversight of existing towers is needed. Beginning with routine, transparent RF radiation measurements, T-Mobile told me they conduct regular RF testing recently, but when I asked for the Wheaton High School RF radiation reports, they said it was proprietary. How can
industrial equipment be installed on school grounds exposing children to continuous RF radiation while parents are denied access to the measured RF radiation exposures? Other countries require continuous RF monitoring on schools in the US, we have no measuring or monitoring program, no
pre-market safety testing, and no federal oversight regarding compliance. As I discussed in my recent published paper and frontiers, please go to Environmental Health. Thank you, thank you, Miss Bisbee. Good afternoon. My name is Jyoti
Bisbee, and I'm a Richard Montgomery proud school parent. I'm here today to urge you to reject option H because it fails M.C.P.S. own planning standards, particularly policy. FAA's requirements for long term system wide balance, efficient use of capacity and
equity. I'm here today because my community lived through the consequences of a similar decision. In 1987. My community stood before this board to oppose the reassignment of Horizon Hill, which the board justified by projections of
under enrollment at Richard Montgomery. That decision did not work. Within just a few years, R-m became overcrowded. The displacement was a planning mistake that accelerated overcapacity at RM. Option H risks repeating that same
mistake only on a larger scale. Today, Richard Montgomery is already near its functional capacity. Residential growth projections show continued growth in Rockville and Gaithersburg through the 2030s, especially around the Rockville Town Center where RM is located.
Eliminating Wootton as a comprehensive high school removes a critical nearby capacity buffer that could relieve future pressures on R-m policy. FAA requires the board to preserve flexibility and avoid solutions that simply
shift overcrowding from one school to another. Option H does exactly that. When Crown High School inevitably becomes overcrowded. If you choose to go with option H, Rockville neighborhoods like falls, Mead and Lakewood would likely be
reassigned, pushing RM beyond sustainable enrollment levels and concentrating growth pressures on one of the county's most academically intensive schools. Please reject option H. Thank you.
Thank you, Mr. Harkness. Good afternoon. Last year, during an interview with Bethesda magazine, Doctor Taylor said, quote, sometimes our execution hasn't been perfect. So every time that we find out that our execution hasn't been great, I
want to hear about it. So in that spirit, I hope you've listened to the many voices saying that adding option H to the boundary study hasn't been great. I hope you've considered the opinions of the Maryland Building Industry Association who wrote, quote, we are concerned that option H would permanently reduce high school
capacity in a designated growth area and disrupt the alignment between school infrastructure and planned residential development. I hope you've heard those saying that option H is not a budget savings, because capital costs are still required. If Wootton is used for temporary holding. I hope that you've also listened to
the transportation experts who say that option H creates the most inefficient and costly transportation plan, a plan which also doesn't align with the Safe Routes to School Schools program. I hope you've listened to the lawyers who have explained that option H does not follow the proper procedures for closing the
school. And finally, I'd like this board to listen to two more voices. The first is Doctor Taylor's, who said that every day is, quote, opportunity to build or erode trust. And the last voice is mine. My name is Mick Herkner. I'm the parent of a Lakewood Elementary School student and a three time board member of the
Lakewood Elementary School PTA. And I feel that by not meeting with the Wootton community before making this decision, Doctor Taylor, you have eroded my trust. But but I'm hoping you didn't need to meet with us because you listened and made the logical decision to oppose option H, and if that's not the
case, I hope this board will listen to the many reasons to save Wootton High School, because saving Wootton High School is not only good for my community, it's good for m.c.p.s. And it's good for Montgomery County. Thank you very much. Thank you, Mr. Sharma. Good afternoon, and
thank you for the opportunity to speak today. I'm here as an educator and as a worried Wooton parent. I'm here to respectfully ask the board to remove option H from consideration. Option H has been presented as fiscally responsible. It is not. It is a short sighted solution, likely
to cost more within just a few years. And with an irreversible academic damage. Wootton says excellence is a product of decades of sustained efforts by educators, administrators, students and their families and wootton's collaborative measures with its feeder school. The real damage of option H is
lost opportunities and weakened academic outcomes for thousands of students. Any perceived academic and social benefits would be negated by overcrowding at Crown within few years. This is directly contradicting M.c.p.s stated priority of academic quality.
Second, there are safety concerns nationally abandoned school facilities have been shown to harm neighborhoods. The safety of middle school students right adjacent to Wootton site must be a central concern in any consideration of option H. Increased bus traffic resulting from option H has
already been spoken widely and would be catastrophic for road safety. Third option H would definitely result in overcrowding of the school. Overcrowded schools consistently experience decline in academic outcomes, diminished student support, reduced access to advanced
coursework, and extracurricular program. Again, a departure from M.c.p.s priorities. In short, closing a high performing school to correct earlier planning mistakes would be a second and a far greater mistake and damaging mistake. There may be many reasons offered to shut the school down,
but only one reason is needed to do the right thing. And today, to do the right thing is to save Wootton. I hope from what you have, what have been said and presented to you in numerous letters and testimonies, each one of you find that one reason to save the school and keep it at,
preserve it at its current location and urgently place it back on CIP. Thank you and thank you for listening to Wootton Community, Miss Lou. Good afternoon members of the
board. I'm a parent to students at Falls Mead Elementary, and I'm here to urge you to reject option H. What concerns me most about option H is the long term instability it creates for the county as a whole. I recently read a letter from the Maryland Building Industry Association
that strongly opposes option H. The association's concerns are clear removing permanent school capacity in a high growth area undermines long term planning and discourages future development. The area surrounding Wootton and Crown high schools are among Moscow's
fastest growing residential areas with and I'm quoting from the letter, thousands of approved and planned housing units. Option H sends a message to builders that school capacity in Montgomery County is uncertain and temporary, and it could limit development due to capacity adjustments and the county's Adequate Public
facilities Ordinance. When capacity is not properly addressed, builders build elsewhere. When new housing is not built, the county's tax base does not grow without a strong and growing tax base, Montgomery County cannot maintain, let alone strengthen,
our school system. Strong schools depend on a strong county, and a strong county depends on proper long term planning that supports growth. The board is facing an important decision that could either harm or help our
county's growth. Option H reduces permanent school capacity. Exactly where growth is happening, undermines confidence in long term planning, and threatens the county's future tax base, upon which our schools rely. So I urge you to choose growth. Choose a strong Montgomery
County and reject option H. Thank you. I will be calling the next five speakers. If you hear a name, please come forward. Sally Stolz, Adrian Riddle, Catherine Pasteur,
Lauren, maybe. Clancy. And Mr. Adam Bangrak. Miss Stolz, if you can start, please. Push
your button. There you go. Thank you. Hello, I'm Sally Stoltz, former CPA, Frost math teacher and Wooton parent. Let's talk money. M.C.P.S. desperately needs more money than Montgomery County and the state of Maryland can provide.
One way Montgomery County is working to increase revenue is by growing the Rockville Gaithersburg biotech corridor. But according to the Maryland Building Industry Association called Mbia, option H will undermine the county's growth plans for the biotech corridor
that will reduce future tax revenue and that will perpetuate the underfunding of M.c.p.s. Operating and capital budgets here is some of what the Mbia wrote in an extensively researched letter to the Board of Education and Doctor Taylor last week. Quote,
after reviewing M.C.P.S. capacity, adopted master plans and planned residential development in the Rockville Gaithersburg corridor. We are concerned that option H would permanently reduce high school capacity in a designated growth area. From a growth management
perspective, reducing Long-Term capacity in a high growth area is inconsistent with sound planning principles. When Long-Term capacity is removed from a growth corridor, projects planned and approved under existing assumptions face increased uncertainty. These
effects undermine Montgomery County's stated goals. MBA Mbia respectfully urges the Board of Education to reject option H and pursue alternatives that preserve Long-Term school capacity, align with adopted growth plans, and support
Montgomery County's shared objectives of housing supply, affordability, fiscal responsibility, and sustainable development. End quote I to urge you to reject option H proverb preserve Wooton High School on Wootton Parkway. This will support Montgomery
County's growth plans and will provide needed revenue for the county and M.c.p.s. Thank you very much, Miss Riddle. Good afternoon. My name is Catherine Pastor. My husband and I are
from North Carolina, where our family still live. Our parents often ask when we'll be moving back. We've chosen to stay here with our three young, very active children a second grader, kindergartner and three year old for the diverse, welcoming community we found in the Wooton cluster and the academic excellence of Montgomery County
Public Schools. Like all parents, we feel stretched thin for time with our kids, our families, and our community. Option H would make that problem significantly worse by adding a large amount of unproductive time and transportation. Option H drastically increases bussing for students not only in the
Wooton cluster, but also for Damascus and Magruder high schools. Should Wootton be used as a holding school versus crown? Optimistically, this averages out to about 30 extra minutes per day over a school year. That's roughly 90 hours per child time spent on a bus. Instead of learning, resting, or being with friends and
family. And for families whose kids participate in after school activities where busses often aren't as available, that same 90 hours gets added to parents schedules, too. This also doesn't even include the extra trips outside normal school hours, even with young children. Now we're at Wootton
monthly for sports field days and community events, all things that make our cluster so special. That time commitment will only grow as our children get older. While M.c.p.s. Has not performed a transportation study, option, H clearly comes with higher transportation expenses, not to mention many
other troublesome financial concerns related to funding patch renovations to make Wootton a holding school. My question for the board is this is the money that needs to be spent to make Wootton a holding school. Not the same money that would be spent to make Wootton safe for its current students. Option H still requires capital
funding yet we've heard there's no money in the CIP for either Magruder or Wootton. If the funding isn't there yet, why choose the option that locks you into a single, permanent high school instead of one that provides flexibility with two? We have heard from builders and other community leaders that losing Wooten's capacity is bad for our county. Please reject option H and pick an option
that gives us more flexibility and better serves the children, families, and long term future of Montgomery County. Thank you all for your time. Thank you. Mr. Arvin riddle. Good afternoon, Doctor Taylor and esteemed members of the board. My name is Adrian Riddle. I'm a resident of Gaithersburg and
the father of two young daughters. I look forward to see. Growing up in the Montgomery County school system, schools aren't just buildings, they are valuable institutions that stand as bedrocks of our communities. I'm thrilled that a brand new high school is being built in the neighborhood, but I'm concerned about it being viewed by M.C.P.S. leadership as simply a new
building, instead of recognizing its greater purpose as a vital piece of the community in which it stands. Gaithersburg needs and deserves the new Crown High School not just as a physical landmark that resides within its boundary, but as an integral component of the community that surrounds it. The land was given for those purposes. Taxes
were levied for those purposes, and the diverse population that called the area home deserve for those intentions to be honored. Existing schools in Gaithersburg are overcrowded, and the continued development in the area will undoubtedly strain that capacity even more. A permanent Crown High School presents a tremendous opportunity to address those
challenges with long term stability and to equitably enrich conditions for the students of these communities. The original Crown boundary study was aligned with those intentions concerning the modified study, abandoned those principles and co-opted the process to propose using the Crown Building to address shortcomings and broader
capital improvement planning. While I can commend the Committee for Creative Thinking, I believe the new options are shortsighted and fail in the duty to provide due service to the affected communities. Temporary holding schools don't serve their communities and are poor solutions for myriad reasons, as already articulated by many before me. And we've
also heard the impassioned testimony from the Wootton community who have expressed their sincere concerns about option H. There are certainly difficult challenges ahead for M.c.p.s. Including the need for significant school repairs and upgrades. But let's not conflate the purpose of the boundary study with the need to solve those separate matters. I
urge the board to harness the groundswell of public participation this boundary study has catalyzed to help identify solutions for those other problems. But for the task at hand, I strongly endorse moving forward with one of the original options, A through D and opening crown as a permanent high school to serve its Gaithersburg
community as originally intended. Thank you for your willingness to listen to this public testimony and consider the comments made. And importantly, thank you for your service to our students and communities. Thank you, Miss Miss Clancy. My name is Laura
Clancy, Doctor Taylor, members of the board. I acknowledge the financial challenges M.c.p.s. Is up against. Many of you were not part of the reckless decisions that brought us to this point. But here we are in a room full of passionate families across many communities begging you to listen to us and opposing option H. Option H is the riskiest and most destabilizing
option. It introduces uncertainty to our county by increasing the probability of future split articulations for Wootton and other clusters. Without a risk mitigation plan for near-term growth, the board is manufacturing a future crisis that will inevitably force yet another disruptive boundary study a clear violation of policy FAA
stability of school assignments over time. This is just one of many problems with option H. Please consider a plan that looks beyond just 2 to 3 years. We need a plan that honors your promise to Gaithersburg and protects educational integrity of both Wootton and Crown communities. You need to find funds to renovate Wootton for
the community that has shown up, not just today but in years prior, because it is the right thing to do for current students and the future of Montgomery County. I also want to bring to your attention the boundary studies, inequity through failed public engagement and lack of transparent communication. This process breeds distrust and fuels resentment between those
that have the means and time versus those that don't. You've made it clear this process requires advocating, but not all communities have the same ability to advocate. Communication needs to be judged for whether or not it is effective, and community engagement needs to be focused on those most impacted. The
entire county is interpreting these boundary studies to mean if you don't make noise or lawyer up, your voice will not be heard, because that is exactly what has happened over the last nine months. There is no transparency on what specific data and assumptions you are using to rationalize options, and we're fed up with it. If you want better community engagement, you need
to be more transparent. Wootton is the only community that has not had a meeting with Doctor Taylor. Despite this bombshell proposal, a rushed six week process is inequitable. No wonder everyone thinks option H has been planned all along. Option H is a fiscal and operational malfeasance rejected by builder associations, multiple community clusters, business
leaders, teachers, elected officials, lawyers, and more. The consensus is clear. I urge you to reject option H and plan for the community long term. Thank you. Mr. Adam McGrath. Good afternoon. Members of the
board. Doctor Taylor, this board knows where I stand, and it knows where the unanimous mayor and council of Rockville stands. So I'm not going to rehash the benefits or detriments of option H. Instead, I want to focus on why this decision matters far beyond one single cluster. This decision
is bigger than any one community or any one city, and it is bigger than any one option. The choice before you will shape how Montgomery County approaches school planning for decades, how we sequence capital projects, how we preserve long term capacity, how we balance growth,
stability and trust. This decision will be cited positively or negatively every time MC M.C.P.S. faces enrollment pressures, modernization needs, or new school opening. And that's why the opposition to option H matters. This is not a narrow
local issue. This is a broad cross cluster, deeply informed resistance. The Wootton students and the PTSA have been clear. The Magruder PTSA and students have raised serious concerns about disruption and
distance. You've heard today from the Richard Montgomery family that spoke about enrollment pressures and equity, and you've heard from the Maryland Business Industry Association, who warned that option H is a mistake for the growth of the county. And even more striking, just moments ago,
you heard from a Crown family who testified that the continued residential development in that area will undoubtedly strain capacity even more when families who would be attending Crown are joining with the families that attend Wootton and the Mbia.
That is something we need to focus on. You can choose between. You don't have to choose between progress and preservation. You can choose both. When Wootton Magruder, Richard Montgomery, Crown families and the building industry are all telling you the same thing, the right answer is clear. Let this
board's legacy be solving complex facilities, challenges, challenges without sacrificing a school and without sacrificing this county's future. Choose stability. Choose growth. Reject. Option H. Thank you. Can we please start
with video testimony and start with video testimony by Miss Blue Nguyen. My school is old and small. My parents told me that it was supposed to be fully renovated years ago. For
some reason nothing happened. I don't know why, but it still loved my little school in this neighborhood. The only thing I hate is the traffic at Darnestown Road. It is very scary and every time we want to go to Kentlands, fodder has to cut through multiple lanes of
traffic to turn left. I saw some accidents during the last few years, moving to fifth out of the wooden cluster means that my father or my mother, if she's brave enough, will have to do it every day to drop me off at my new middle school.
Just one accident can be too many. After my last bow board of Education testimony, my popularity is rocketing. Well, that's not what I want. I just want my voice to be heard. So do my friends. So please don't move to Fife. Please don't move
to Fife. I want to experience all the joyful moments my elder sister had at Wooton. If Duffy was moved, all our healthy and happy mindsets would be filled with sorrow and we would miss out on all the new things we could discover at Wooton. I love to play soccer. There
aren't enough girls in my grade at Duffy to start a team, so I joined the team at Stone mill and I've been playing with them for seven seasons. My teammates are really nice and friendly. I would love to go to high school with them. Maybe we could end up playing soccer for wooden together. Hi, I'm Anna, I go to
Dufief Elementary School. I love my school, my teachers and my friends. I want to go to Wilton just like my big brother and sister. Please don't move. Thief! Please keep our family and community together. Wooton isn't just our school, it's our
family. Please let us stay together and keep Dufief in the Wooton cluster. Please keep the thief with frost and wooden. Don't move to thief. Can we now play Miss Maxine Keefe? My name
is Maxine Keefe, and I'm a busy, overworked parent who has, out of necessity, become well versed in county decision making and boundary impacts. Agency decision making requires meaningful and transparent public engagement. Unfortunately, the county fails on both counts. Public engagement on options E through H was significantly shorter
than that on A through D, and the county provided no data or rationale behind the proposed options. Further, the county gave only two months to consider option H. This inconsistent treatment and lack of explanatory information makes a public engagement process arbitrary and capricious regarding actual
choices. Option H is the most destructive option. It doesn't solve a problem, but rather spreads instability across the greatest number of school communities simultaneously. Wooton students are permanently displaced needlessly far from their home school and reassigned to Crown. McGruder and Damascus. Students are sent to a distant holding site never
designed for their communities. Increasing commute times and breaking established feeder patterns. The ripple effects of option H place additional pressure on nearby clusters, including Richard Montgomery, which was already operating near capacity. The schools rely on boundary stability for academic stability. No other option forces so many clusters
Rockville, Gaithersburg and beyond to absorb disruption simultaneously. Further, option H is at odds with planned development and population growth. I live near the in-progress Rockshire development and see firsthand the huge demand for more housing in this area. By closing a permanent school in a high growth zone, you ensure
the new Crown High School will be overcapacity in the very near future. Families and communities like falls, Mead and Spring will face double displacement shuffled into a new boundary now only to be shuffled again in the near future when inevitable overcrowding forces another revision, introducing further financial and systematic risk.
In contrast, options like F and G modernize aging facilities while preserving community stability. Whereas option H permanently destabilizes multiple clusters at once. I urge the board to reject this path of maximum disruption, and instead choose a path that respects our growth and our
students stability. We play Miss Sylvia mwangi. Testimony. Good afternoon, Superintendent doctor Taylor, members of the Board of Education and community members. My name is Sylvia mwangi and I'm a parent of two daughters in the Wooton cluster. I work in the development field where
decisions are guided by data. Long term impacts and the responsible use of limited resources. I am here today because option H fails on all three. We recognize the fiscal constraints, but short term fixes like those used in the Walter Johnson cluster have caused lasting harm. Option H will repeat that mistake.
Option H is an anti-growth option, permanently reducing capacity in growing communities while delivering no real savings. Once transportation and the retrofit costs are considered. With no funding for permanent renovations at Wooton or McGruder, option H relies on the temporary retrofits while
still requiring money to renovate Wooton and removing it as a long term solution, delaying the capacity problem rather than solving it. Independent review supports the conclusion. The Maryland Building Industry Association analyzed M.C.P.S. capacity data alongside the adopted master plans and housing projections,
and found that option H permanently reduces high school capacity in a state designated growth area. Misaligning school infrastructure with planned residential development. The growth data reinforces this concern. Gaithersburg Sami projects the city's population
to increase by 23% by 2050, with nearly 4000 housing units delivered in 2025 alone. Rockville has more than 6000 additional units in the pipeline, and the Rockville Town Center master plan is expected to drive further enrollment growth at surrounding schools, with over
3000 additional units planned in the near future. Option H does not solve a problem. It creates one a permanent one. It constraints future capacity, destabilizes communities, increases transportation burdens, and ultimately delivers no meaningful savings.
As my daughter likes to say, the math is not my thing. I urge the board to reject option H and pursue solutions that are grounded in data, aligned with long term planning, and worthy of our students future. Thank you for your service. Board members, thank you. This will
conclude public comment. The board's next meeting to receive public comment is on Thursday, February 19th. Online signupspeo onlinenups,ameay in-p signups are p
whence with an allocated slots filled on a first come, first served basis. In-person sign ups will close 15 minutes before the start of the open session, or when all slots are filled. Additional information regarding upcoming meetings can be found on the
board's website. With that, we will move now to item 7.1. This will be the legislative briefing where on the agenda. There we go. Thank you, miss Patty. I will turn it over now
to our board's legislative affairs coordinator, miss Patty. Unsprung. Good afternoon, president Rivera-Oven. Superintendent Taylor, members of the Board of Education. I know we still have a full agenda ahead of us, so I have a brief update for you. I'm going
to ask you to take a position on a single bill today. The bill that I'm presenting to the board is House Bill 340. This is a school psychologist Interstate Licensure Compact. What this does is grant
reciprocity to school psychologists for anyone who any state who's in the compact. So if you are licensed in one state, you can easily move to another state. And your license in their original state will apply in the next state. This allows mobility. It's something that's available with a lot of
other professions. We have a shortage of school psychologists, so this will allow us to recruit from other states and have the the move just be easier. Some of our neighboring states, Delaware
and West Virginia, are already participating in the compact. Pennsylvania and Virginia have legislation pending right now that would allow them to join it. These are four states that we do a lot of recruiting from. So if we were also part of this compact, it would make mobility between all of those states
just a little bit easier. So the recommended position for this board is to support this bill. And I would ask that you take a position. Okay. Is there a motion and a second to approve the recommended position. Move to support. I am happy to second that motion.
Okay. There's a motion and a second. Is there any discussion? Okay. All those in favor, please raise your hand. Okay. And that is unanimous with those present. Wonderful. The
rest of the bill report is our platform positions, and you can review them at your leisure. Thank you very much. Thank you. Does anybody want to pull any
any items? I just did I did I neglect to to ask that we're good. We're good. Okay. Just wanted to make sure. Now I'll move to the next item, 8.1. And this would be the discussion on the superintendent's
recommendation on secondary program analysis and boundary studies. I'll pass it on to Doctor Taylor. Thank you, Madam President. Today is a big day for M.c.p.s. Today I will present my recommendation for the secondary program analysis
and for two major boundary studies. Today, we'll bring together all of the effort that we have been engaged in for many months and present a cohesive foundation for the school system to move forward into the future. There's an old
adage that if it isn't broke, don't fix it. And though there may be much debate over what is broken and what is not, I think that I'll share two key disappointments that I think we've experienced over the past several years, if not more.
Number one, that performance in our district is not what we'd like it to be. And number two, that equity of access to programs limits our students ability to unleash their potential. And so as as a follow up to this old adage
related to broken things, we have a really important question to answer. Do we have the courage to fix our broken things, or at least to try? Today is a big day for M.c.p.s. Because we will soon find out
if we do or if we don't. While I'm excited to bring the result of this work, I know that change is hard. It is hard for our system and it's hard for our community. Critical family decisions are made about where people live, what they do, and
how they go about their lives, often tied to the schools their children attend. This is an emotional topic, and candidly, one of the best things about Montgomery County. Everyone cares about the school system,
even when we don't like it from time to time. And to that end, change is also critically important for systems and for communities to grow and to stay dynamic. Without change, we
cannot and will not improve. We've talked about several hard truths this year, most of which were financial, and I have one more. So here goes. There is no perfect mix of programs, and there is no perfect boundary
map for school assignments. It doesn't exist in no jurisdiction in America, let alone in Maryland or Montgomery County. Is every parent completely aligned with how the school assignments are drawn? This is true because every
student, every parent, every guardian, every caretaker, every family, and every staff member all experienced these changes and assignments differently. As superintendent, my role and ultimately the role of the Board of Education is to make decisions that are
sustainable and put us on a sustainable course for equity, operational excellence, and ultimately, student success and better outcomes. We have to separate some of the emotion that are tied to these important decisions. To this
end, I think that we're proposing a giant step forward in a lot of areas, and I think that there's going to be a lot of room for celebration. This has been an extensive and at times exhaustive journey for us, and definitely for our M.C.P.S.
communities. We so value the thoughtful, positive, and creative engagement and advocacy that so many have brought to these discussions. Very candidly, it's been amazing. Your feedback was critical at each stage of the process and each evolution of
every map. I know that there's been some criticism about the process that we followed, but this is the process that was laid out at the beginning of our process, that there would be iterative maps along the way, and I'm beyond appreciative for the numerous conversations that
I've had personally with parents, with students, with community members about community priorities. Your feedback has been phenomenal, and I even missed a couple of meetings thanks to the snowstorm. Don't worry, we're going to reschedule Wooten and a few others, and you'll have a chance to talk to me before
this is decided. I've done a few boundary studies and a few program changes in my career. All were different in their own way, but all of them share three really significant commonalities. The first, none of them were easy. The second,
all of them become emotional at points. And the third, many of the things that folks fight for or fight to reject today are often the same things that they fight to preserve just a few years later. And let's be honest, in some of the feedback
that the board has received, not all of the adult behavior has represented the best version of our community, or what we would want to model for our children, from cyber attacks to direct physical threats. This has not been pleasant. At every step along
the way, there has been a whole lot that was just flat out unacceptable. As this process concludes next month, I implore all of us that we must do better as a community. We can both agree and disagree
respectfully, and we must model this for the next generation. As pointed out in testimony today, that the young people are watching us. Aside from a few notable disappointments, I am thankful for the many more
members of the community who brought solutions, suggestions, ideas, critical details, and challenging questions to the deliberations. All of this made our work stronger and my recommendation better. Not
perfect, but definitely better. Thank you. Many of you will see your voice represented in these recommendations, and I know that many of you will not. Hearing and considering input does not mean that we will always agree or be able to
grant every single request. As a matter of fact, it is logistically impossible to grant every single request. But know that you are heard even if there is disagreement, and that we value your thoughts when prioritizing the feedback. Because that's precisely what
we have to do is prioritize feedback. Ultimately, our recommendations are grounded in the board's policy and fiduciary responsibility. So today is a big day for M.C.P.S. but it's also a good day. In the beginning of this formal
review process, which begins today. We will work towards setting M.C.P.S. on a path that takes a giant step forward in addressing outdated school assignment patterns, making good use of our facility assets, achieving infrastructure
improvement with efficiency and within constrained financial resources, and giving many students as possible in our school system, access to excellent learning environments, programs and opportunities. Before I turn things over to
our subject matter experts who will lead us through today's recommendations and presentations, I implore you, for those that are joining us today in person, to be patient and sit through all of our presentation today, not just
one part or another, to listen with a critical ear and to provide your feedback at the appropriate times. I'd like to thank the staff members who worked very hard throughout the past year on this process. It was not easy at times. We had
teams that were working on program development and analysis, as well as facility and boundary work in conjunction and simultaneously, and heard from many, often conflicting voices in our community. Thank you for your
very hard and dedicated work. You are dedicated servants to Montgomery County, and we all appreciate everything that you've done to bring us here today, even though it might be challenging. So without further ado, I'd like to pass things over to our Chief Academic
Officer, Nikki Porter, and our Chief Operations Officer, Adnan Mamoon, and our Deputy Chief of facilities, Andrea Sueoka. Thank you, Doctor Taylor. Good afternoon, President Rivera-Oven and members of the board. If you could advance to
the next slide, please. Today's recommendations reflect two connected efforts boundary alignment and program expansion. The work intentionally brings facility planning and program planning together rather than
addressing them separately. Planning them simultaneously allows us to right size schools while thoughtfully placing programs where space and student demand align, supporting long term sustainability instead of
concentrating specialized programs in just a few locations, we are creating a system where high quality options are available closer to where students live. On November 20th, we shared our proposal for the Regional
Program Service model. Today, we'll provide a brief summary of a few updates followed by the boundary study recommendations. This represents the culmination of months of careful analysis, planning, and community outreach, and where great,
we're grateful for the opportunity to share with you today. If you go to the next slide, please. We are recommending a regional service
delivery model that groups high school geographically to better coordinate programs and support. Each region will offer a portfolio of specialized pathways giving students strong parallel options within the five program themes without
needing to travel across the county. Students will experience clearer pathways, expanded access, and reliable transportation to support participation. Our purpose in this work has been consistent historically, access to
specialized programs has depended too heavily on geography and lottery odds. This model addresses those inequities by eliminating geographic barriers and placing programs closer to students homes. It expands offerings to
better reflect student interests and workforce needs. It shifts us from scarcity, with limited seats and long commutes to abundance, with more options available in every region. Ultimately, it ensures that every student has access
to high quality opportunities no matter where they live. Next slide please. As a reminder, these are our program themes developed in partnership with our community. These themes represented in every region
throughout both criteria based and interest based pathways. They reflect the program areas that all M.c.p.s students should have access to, regardless of where they live. Within each theme, there are multiple pathways which also
which are also outlined in the attached materials. Next slide please. Since our November 20th proposal presentation, we have partnered with schools to incorporate community and staff
feedback and finalize and expand our Stem pathways. We finalized the visual performing arts and design pathways, aligning each program with the unique strengths and assets of the host schools. We worked closely with school and central
office leaders to confirm pathways at each school, build shared understanding for the regional model, refine courses and student experiences, and obtain feedback on admissions approaches. We also have continued to work on
professional learning plans to support staff implementation. Finally, we benchmarked with other districts to inform the development of strong and equitable program admissions practices that consider both criteria and interest based
placement. Next slide please. As you'll see on the following updated pathway slides, every region includes the same core program themes to ensure our commitment to consistent access across the county. Before I
share a few highlights, it's important to note that local programs which are not shown on these slides will continue to be offered at each school. So here's region one and two. One update in region two is that Blake designed pathway Within
the Arts theme has been finalized to include animation and game design, as well as fashion design opportunities. Next slide please. In region three, Walter Johnson High School's leadership program has been identified and will focus
on law and criminal justice. And at Wooton, the interest based Stem pathway will be cybersecurity. Next slide please. On this slide you will see two versions of region five.
This is because we have a plan to address any boundary study recommendation that is put forward today. So version one includes High School 27 which will host the Medical Sciences pathway. Version two of region
five. The medical science pathway will be at Quince Orchard High School, and Watkins Mill will offer the Humanities and Critical Languages pathway. And finally, next slide new in region six will be Poolesville will host
the Regional Engineering pathway, while Seneca Valley will host cybersecurity. This update was developed in partnership with school leaders at both schools, at both schools, to better align each program with the unique strengths and assets of the
schools. While pathways may vary some by location, every region offers a strong mix of themes, ensuring all students have access to a wide range of high quality opportunities closer to home. Next slide please. Looking ahead this
spring we will continue program pathway design and development with school teams, including teachers currently teaching in the programs. We will engage elementary and middle school families throughout through interest surveys, information nights, and outreach so
students understand their options. Early. Early awareness and admissions communication will continue to ensure all students and families have equitable access to the information. Our goal is for every family to feel informed,
prepared and able to take advantage of many opportunities available in their region. We will continue to gather feedback and refine our approach as we move toward launch. I'll now turn it over to Adnan Mahmood, Chief Operations Officer. Next slide
please. Good afternoon. We are here this afternoon. As Doctor Taylor has already mentioned, we're glad to be here today to present the superintendent's recommendation. We will start out with the recommendation for the reopening of Charles
Woodward High School, as well as the expansion of Northwood High School. Before we get into the next slide, please. Before we get into the actual recommendation, I would like to go over and remind everybody of
the, the the work that we have been doing over the past little over a year. In December of 2025, the Board of Education adopted a resolution that approved the use of a consultant. And we started our
work with the consultant and started gathering the information about enrollment projections and went out to the went out to the community in April with initial information sessions and informing the
public about how we're going to conduct the study, as well as at what points we would come out to the communities in May of 2025. The first round of options were presented, and we also shared surveys with the community. We gathered feedback
on those surveys and synthesize the feedback and developed further options, and went out to the community in September of 2025. And then additional options and public information sessions happened in October. And then we had additional
options as per board's resolution, and that was shared with the community in November. And then the public had another opportunity to provide feedback. We gathered all those feedbacks and synthesized those data and
shared with Doctor Taylor in in preparation for preparing his recommendation. We are here today to present the recommendations. There will be public information sessions and hearings in February and March before the board makes a
decision on the March 26th session. Next slide please. And just a reminder to everybody, our work with the boundary study is in alignment with the board's policy FAA, which includes four factors. That includes demographic
characteristics of student population, which takes into makes us look into creating diverse student body in each of the affected schools. And then geography is the second factor, which takes into account the
geographic proximity of communities to school articulation patterns, traffic and transportation patterns, and stability of school assignment over time. To make sure the we consider the student assignments for as long a period as possible, so that
students are not moving multiple times over their school as they matriculate through primary, through middle and high schools, and then facility utilization, which, you know, kind of forces us to
look into utilizing our facilities within the 80 to 100% efficient range, as well as, you know, being fiscally responsible to minimize any capital and operating costs whenever feasible. With that, I'm going to pass it over to Miss Docca to take us over through the recommendation. Yes.
Next slide please. Again, before we dig into the actual recommendations, we did want to start with an overview of the housing development pipeline. This was mentioned many times in the testimonies that we've heard today. And over the course of the last several months. This is an overview of how we work through that
process with many of our county municipalities and the overall Montgomery County planning. We do anticipate this will be a continued conversation as we move through the next two months, and we'll continue to share more data. But we wanted to start with how do we account for potential student growth through future developments?
This is key as we think about boundaries and just our overall pipeline. So pipeline development is that which has begun the regulatory process, whether that's with Montgomery County planning, whether that's with the city of Gaithersburg or the city of Rockville. It is important to note that only
approved site plans are used in the M.C.P.S. six year enrollment projections. Pipeline development is analyzed across three different sources that we use that includes Montgomery County planning, the city of Gaithersburg, and the City of Rockville. Those are the two municipalities that have their
own jurisdiction to approve separate and independent pipeline development. With each of those three entities, we receive data 2 to 3 times a year on their pending and approved status, 2 to 3 times a year. Montgomery Planning also
transmits a GIS file to M.C.P.S. showing that pipeline development that allows us to overlay it with each of our high school clusters and really take that into consideration within that file also includes the approved site plans for the city of Gaithersburg and the City of Rockville. Next slide
please. We wanted to map this out for the pipeline development data. This comes from sources both from Montgomery County planning the city of Rockville and the city of Gaithersburg. Each of them used slightly different terms, but the top bar what that's showing is development that has
started the process but does not have a formal approval. And this is the process that all development takes. So there hasn't been a formal approved site plan, which is what triggers it to be considered in our projection. But that light blue is the Montgomery County planning. So everything else in Montgomery County, outside of
the city of Rockville and the city of Gaithersburg, and then the bottom line is what is approved site plans that is included. Those numbers are included in our projections each year as we develop the September 30th preliminary enrollment projections. Next
slide please. So how does our analysis show that the superintendent's recommendation for both boundary study areas can accommodate the potential student enrollment? We foresee with current information, we want to acknowledge that much of the pipeline is already
included in our projections, largely due to its designation. Again, as approved project plans are approved site plans because unapproved project plans are likely to move forward at different times in the future as approved site plans as well. Not every
projected student will be in M.C.P.S. at the same time, so when that site plan is approved, right, they come in over time. It's not like all of a sudden there is a whole group of them that is important for us to take into account. And that's that's really what that last bullet is saying too, right?
Not all students come to the same high school as that development happens. Next slide please. We also wanted to talk about the implementation for both of the boundary studies. It is the superintendent's recommendation for high school
that the implementation start in school year 2728, with grades nine and ten moving to their new high school of assignment, with grades 11 and 12 remaining in their current high school of assignment. And over the next two school years. So 2829, we would add another grade that would include nine
through 11 in their new high school, with 12 finishing out in their current high school assignment. And by school year 2930. We have full implementation at the high school level and grades nine through 12. The middle school is a similar process where the recommendation is for school
year 2728. Grades six and seven would move to their new middle school and by school year 2829, full implementation would be in place for the middle school for grades six through eight. With that, let's go to the next
slide, and I'm going to hand it back to Adnan to talk about the study scope. Yeah. Just a quick reminder for the Woodward reopening of Woodward and Northwood boundary study scope. We have the I'm not going to read out the all the middle schools and high schools. But
the these are the schools that were listed in the study scope area. And they were included in the recommendation. Go over to the next slide, please. Oh, just a quick reminder also that we did not include the boundary study scope, did not include
any elementary boundary changes. I wanted to quickly go over about the survey responses that we received and highlight the ones that we have heard more repeatedly than others. So on the demographic characteristics
of student populations, the the public shared their concerns about, you know, making sure we're paying attention to not creating concentrations of poverty on the geography. Most of the feedback that we received, and we did receive most of the feedback in the geography, as well as the
stability of school assignment in these two criterias. Under geography, we heard concerns about, you know, or asking us to maximizing proximity to proximity of the communities to schools, asking us to consider traffic patterns and pedestrian
safety, overlapping walk zones and school reassignments. And definitely we've also heard in the testimonies today as well, avoiding long school commutes and bus rides, stability of school assignments over time, avoiding split articulation for schools. Avoid changes for
schools with recent boundary reassignments, and minimizing disruptions to disproportionate split articulation on facility utilization. Concern for facility utilization rates greater than 100% or those less than 80%. So just to for us to
keep it within the 80 to 100% range under utilization, that may lead to limitations and course access. Those were the concerns that were shared under academic programing. We heard concerns about future and criteria based programs and
continuity of articulation for two way immersion programs. Next slide please. So what everyone has anxiously been awaiting are the maps. For the sake of this presentation, we have provided a simplified
version, but online, on board docs and on the website and the traditional way we have been doing so. There will be the detailed maps where everyone can zoom in and find their individual school. We will have the full data tables and everything that has been going. With all the options that we have provided to date. We
wanted to start with this. This recommendation recommendation is a modified version of B that was shared earlier this fall, with a few notable changes, and we'd like to go ahead and talk to the next slide about some of the highlights of the articulation chart. This lists
all of the high schools that are in this boundary study, and I want to really just highlight the key one here with who will articulate to Woodward. Please remember that the asterisk does denote split articulation to the middle school and or high
school. And we do have some of those. Most of those in both these studies are largely due to islands. And that's important to remember as you look at the map. So for the new reopening of Woodward, the elementaries include Viers Mill, farmland, Garrett Park, Kensington, Parkwood, Lux Manor,
Wheaton Woods and the three high schools will be a combination of Lederman, Tilden and Parkland. I'm not going to read through the rest, but the traditional articulation tables that everyone is used to seeing will also be available online
for folks to look at. Let's go to the next slide, please. We have also tried to break out a few notable changes. We have noted some of those, and I highlighted that on the last slide with those that have been
reassigned from their current high schools to Woodward. In order to open this, new schools need to go there. I do want to highlight that Garrett Park and Kensington Park would have split articulation to Woodward and to Walter Johnson. And again, that is really due to the islands that directly
surround the Woodward facility. We also talk about the paired schools and ensuring that they have straight articulation. And we have listed those out in the slide, geographic proximity and noncontiguous boundaries remain important. And I've already mentioned the Garrett Park and
Kensington Parkwood, but also highlighting Arcola as another one on the map that you will see has split articulation to high school as well. Again, it has an island, middle school and high school reassignments. We highlight a few there as
well. Woodland has a split articulation where part of it will go to Silver Creek and then to Bethesda Chevy Chase High School, and the majority of it will go to Silver Spring International Middle School. And Albert Einstein. And
finally, a few other highlights on the expansion of Northwood High School. Flora singer is reassigned from Einstein to Northwood and Sligo Creek. Goes straight. Articulation to Northwood. Next slide please.
We want to just walk through just a few other highlights of this recommendation. Based on the FAA policy factors. So when we talk about the demographic characteristics of student population, the majority of middle school and high schools had little to no changes for
percentage of resident students in the 25, 26 for the farms and ML, and those that experience increases or decreases did so primarily because of reassignments based on geographic proximity. We have noted which schools had an increase, which had a decrease,
and which had no changes. I will say, and you'll see this in the data tables online, that the increase and decreases, some are very small, a point, you know, 2 or 3 percentage, while others might have a 1 or 2. But we did try to minimize
that. Next slide please. I wanted to just highlight a few of the geography. So these are just two examples of schools with noncontiguous boundaries or island assignments that have split articulation based on geographic proximity to the middle school or high school
and the boundary scope. We have talked also throughout the capital improvement, and we have a presentation for you after this boundary of a proposed scope for theelementart is an opportunity for us to revisit these island assignments. So I won't spend a ton of time in this
presentation. We'll have the opportunity to get into it in the next presentation, but this just highlights. You can see on the left image, you know, one, two and three are Harmony Hills, Brookhaven and George and forests. And we are recommending the split articulation due to that
geographic proximity. And then you can see number four on the right is Garrett Park and number six is Kensington Parkwood. Those are islands adjacent and right near the Woodward High School. Next slide please. We also wanted to highlight some of the stability
of school assignment over time. All paired primary and intermediate schools have straight articulation to middle school and high school. We've listed them out here on the slide. Currently they do not all have that. And that was important. And we heard that
feedback throughout this process. Next slide please. And then certainly facility utilization. So in the recommendation all middle and high schools in the boundary study scope have facility utilization rates less than
100%. I'll just pause for people to look at. And then we'll go to the next slide please. And we'd like to end this part of the Woodward recommendation, just really highlighting the goals that are
accomplished in this recommendation. We've considered demographic characteristics of student population. We've taken into account geographic proximity of communities to schools, articulation, traffic, transportation patterns, topography. We've considered
recent boundary changes and result in stable student assignments for as long a period as possible. Move facility utilization rates to 80% to 100% efficient range over the long term, whenever possible. For middle and high schools in the boundary study
scope and minimize fiscal and operating costs whenever feasible, and obtain input from multiple stakeholders using broad outreach of community engagement. So that concludes the Woodward portion of it. Keep going. We will move into
the Crown recommendation. Just give me one second. I don't see anybody has any. So we're good colleagues okay. Keep going okay. Do the summary. So for
our second recommendation for the Crown Damascus boundary study, the superintendent's recommendation is to relocation of Thomas Wootton High School and the expansion of Damascus High School. If you go to the
next slide, please. So the question is why are we the superintendent is recommending relocating Thomas Wootton High School and why not open a new high school, number 27 at Crown Farm. Based on the data as as
part of the boundary study, more students can walk to school under this recommendation. This is the best use of a brand new facility, and then it creates a secondary holding school. We've had this discussion with the board during our conversations. Is not having a secondary
holding school creates a barrier for us for our capital improvements programs, not only just for our major capital programs, but it allows us to accelerate a lot of the high school projects that take multiple years to complete,
including roofing projects and HVAC projects. It will, and it addresses the facility needs of Thomas Fulton High School needs expressed by the community. It's fiscally responsible
because, again, as we pointed out, there are going to be more walkers to to this school than they are currently to Thomas Wootton, and it would eliminate the need to operate a 27th high school that would definitely have a savings on our operating
costs. Next slide please. Just a quick reminder and again, I will not go through reading the list, but these are the middle schools and high schools that were included in the this boundary study scope. And again a reminder that no elementary
schools were included in as part of the boundary study, only the middle and high school boundaries. Next slide please. I'm going to take us to very similar slides like we did for the Woodward Northwood, starting with our maps. The
recommendation is a modified version of option H with a few notable changes. Just like I stated during the Woodward Northwood, these maps will be available in the more detailed version that the community is used to reviewing, and that will be available online. Next
slide please. We also wanted to highlight some of what we heard throughout this process, very consistent with the Woodward and Northwood boundary, where geography and stability of school assignment over time remained the two top priorities of the feedback that we
received in numerous ways. Next slide please. This slide starts to show the recommendation for the articulation chart. You can see we have labeled the relocation for Thomas S Wooton
at Crown Farm. We are showing Fife Falls Mead Fields Road, Lakewood a portion of the Rosemont. There is an island there. Stone mill and Travilah will be in the Wooton relocation Crown farm boundary
as well as frost, a portion of Hoover and Cabin. John. Next slide please. We wanted to note a few important implementation and changes. So we talked earlier about the
implementation recommendations starting in school year 2728 and how that would work its way through for the three years for high school and the two years for the middle school. That is all true for Woodward, Northwood. There are a couple nuances for this. One, we do
want to highlight from the very beginning that we acknowledge that Churchill High School will exceed capacity in this recommendation. It is over 100%. And you will see that in the data table. This is currently what they stand out. So we are not exceeding the degree to
which they're over utilized. This maximizes the stability of assignment and geography. And the overutilization we feel can be addressed through regional programing. Damascus High School and you will see this in the effects table will be temporarily exceed the capacity. So it will be over 100% really
just due to the implementation plan and because of their current capacity, until their major capital project is complete. So it will be four years. And again, you will see that in the effects table where they will be over 100%. Once the major capital project is complete, they will not be.
They will be. In the 80s. We did want to highlight just because this one is complicated with the implementation plan. A couple of things up in the Damascus Clarksburg area. So there are two elementary schools that currently have split articulation that's Lanesville and Cedar Grove,
that we are recommending full implementation with everyone else starting in that 2728 to Damascus. And that's really why it's going to put it over that 100%. We are trying to have stability of over time, not having people split and articulate and implementing everything to the best of our
ability. In the timeline that we are recommending, the one elementary school that we are recommending on a delayed implementation plan is Snowden Farms. They currently split between Clarksburg and Damascus. We are recommending that stay so there's no change in stability for them. And once
the major capital project is complete for Damascus High School and school year 3132, then we would implement the Snowden farm change. So that is the one change to the implementation plan. Next slide please. We've also highlighted
by high school cluster a number of other notable changes per cluster. And I won't read through each of these but wanted to just call out. So people really understood some of the changes that were happening specific to their either elementary school, middle school, and how that changes at the high school
level. Next slide please. We've also broken out some of the recommendation components by the FAA policy factors. So highlighting some of the things in the utilization as well as the demographic characteristics, the stability of school
assignment over time and the geographic proximity. I do want to highlight in that specific area. The last column, the geographic proximity we have provided, there are 551 resident students for school year, 2526 within the
Non-transported area for the current Wooton High School. When we calculate that same area, non-transportable students. So the walkers over at the Crown Farm site, that is an increase from what is at the current Wooton. So it would go
up to 718 students. So there are more walkers up at the Crown Farm site than the current Wooton site. Next slide please. We've also created the table so as to call out and highlight for people where there's an increase, the
decrease or the no change in the farms and ML. And again each of these increases and decreases do vary and recommend everyone look at the data tables if you want to know the specific percentage. Next slide please. We wanted to highlight
just a few examples of some of the changes and how we address some of the geography. So on the left is an example of schools with contiguous boundaries but have major roadways between them. So this is Gibbs Elementary School with
270 really splitting it. And we are recommending that they do split to Neillsville on the west side of 270 again. So it shows a split articulation. But the recommendation is really because of the geographic barrier that 270 creates.
Another example is an example of a school with noncontiguous boundaries because of island assignments. So you can see Clopper mill as called out. Next slide please. Only six of the 59 elementary schools that
articulate into secondary schools in this boundary study scope have split articulation to high school. We have noted that here Clopper, Mill and Gibbs were on the previous slide as examples. And just to remind everyone I know we will get to that presentation eventually today. But we do
have scope recommendation for potential elementary boundary study. This would be an opportunity to start to address some of these as well, and to reduce even more of the split articulations. Next slide please. Facility utilization.
We already in the previous slide called out Churchill High School being the only high school that is over the 100%. Again, this aligns with what their current utilization is, and everything else falls within the 80 to 100%. And you will see the middle school table on the right hand side as
well. Next slide please. We just wanted to recap this recommendation with the goals accomplished. So we considered the demographic characteristics of the student population. We took into account the geographic proximity of communities to school, the
articulation, traffic, transportation patterns, and topography. We considered recent boundary studies and changes and result in stable student assignments for a long period of time as possible. We considered the facility utilization rates of that 80 to
100%, and we obtained input from multiple stakeholders using broad outreach of community engagement. With that, I'm going to hand it back to Doctor Taylor. Yeah. Before we move forward, the board has directed me to generate one recommendation for each of
these boundary studies, and that that is my obligation, and I certainly have done that. These are the two recommendations that I'm asking the board to consider. The second recommendation is pretty significant because it involves the relocation of a high school.
That is a pretty dramatic move that normally is not a part of a boundary study change to better accomplish some facility utilization, I am introducing if you'll move to the next slide, an an alternate
consideration. Even though this is not my recommended suggestion for the board's consideration, I do want to put it forward. Should the board not go with my recommendation. What a best alternative might look like. And in this
alternative it does consider what opening an A high school 27 would look like. And so I'll I'll pass it back to the team to outlay some of the highlights of what this map configuration could look like. In the event that the board does not accept my
recommendation and I will be crystal clear, my recommendation is what has been presented. This is the alternate to that recommendation. Should you not accept that recommendation? So, as Doctor Taylor already mentioned, for the non
recommended alternate, we wanted to provide some highlights of this alternate for the capacity. It would be low across almost all of the high schools with two high schools would be at less than
80% capacity. And then obviously, as I talked about earlier, the secondary holding schools with this option, there would be no secondary holding schools, which would have impact on our ability to deliver capital projects, and then additional delays for
improvements to the current Thomas Wooton High School facility. And then we already also talked about the fiscal impact of operating an additional comprehensive high school. Number 27, if you could go to the next slide. And so this is the map for the
alternate approach showing the crown area in the in the map or the high school number 27. In the map where it's highlighted in white. That would be the suggested area for high school number 27 boundary. If you
could go to the next slide please. And as I already mentioned in the highlight slide, as you can see, there would be multiple high schools with the shaded in light blue. That would be well below 80%
utilization rate. And there would be quite a few middle schools that are going to be in that utilization rate as well. If this alternate is chosen. Next slide please. So I wanted
to end with the just a reminder to the public before we start taking questions for the from the board members. So our public hearing number one which would be for the Crown Damascus boundary study is scheduled for Monday, February 23rd. And then
public hearing number two is scheduled for Tuesday, February 24th. That would be the focus of that would be Woodward Northwood boundary study. And then work. Session number two is scheduled for March 3rd. And then two more public hearing, which would be for the CIP
projects, are scheduled for March 9th and 10th. And and then work session number three is scheduled for March 12th. And then the Board of Education is scheduled to make a decision on the boundary changes as well
as CIP on March 26th for the final decision. With that, we're here to answer any questions. Thank you very much.
Miss Wolff. So first, thank you. I want to thank you for the work that you've done on this. This has been a tremendous lift, and I know it's taken a lot from your families over the years. So I want to thank you
for that. But first, I wanted to also thank Doctor Taylor for his opening remarks. I did something that I never do, and that is I wrote out my remarks of what I wanted to say today to be sure to include it, and a
lot of it parallels exactly what you said. I ran for the Board of Education because I saw firsthand the inequities in access to programs, to opportunity that was structurally built into the
system. They were actually built into this school system. I've seen how well-meaning programs originally conceived, based on an antiquated idea of integration, resulted in segregation within our schools.
These have become intractable barriers to access the vast majority of our students, especially those in the East County, where they are systematically disadvantaged to accessing programs. And I know
it's not just the East County, because I look up county, too, and see the same lack of access to programs. But over the years, every time there's been an attempt to expand access, it has been met with opposition
from those advantaged by the status quo. And yes, you'll probably come after me, but that's how I feel time and time again. This system has bowed to the pressure. You've set a clear vision for a truly
equitable system. I know the regionalization won't be perfect, but I'm happy to see M.C.P.S. make this commitment to moving to a model of abundance where opportunity isn't reserved for just a few. Don't let perfection be the
enemy of progress. I just had to say that, and I just had to say that behind what you said. Thank you, Miss Wolff. Miss Montoya, thank you. I just wanted to join Miss Wolff's comments about access to
programs. It's very clear we see it from the data. We see it as a parent who lives that experience. So I just really appreciate Miss Wolff's continued push for this access so that all of our students have access to the wonderful programs and things that you're proposing here. And thank you to Miss Porter and her team for
all of your work, Mr. Mahmoud, miss, and all of your teams, because there are a lot of people who are not sitting at the table who work so hard every day. And I see all of you, so please know that I do. So I wanted to just as a logistics matter. Thank you for the the way you presented the
information with the charts and the tables. It was just really helpful for me personally to really understand where decreases changes and things like that. So just thank you so much in that way for presenting that. This is obviously a lot of information for us to take in. So I will be, you know,
revisiting all of the information you presented as well as I know people have sent us emails, statements, testified before the board. I will be reviewing all of that to help me make my decision. So thank you. Miss Stewart. I do
want to give my thanks to staff. This is a huge project. We're not done yet, but we're we're going to get there. And I also want to acknowledge that the status quo is actually not okay.
We have to move forward. I appreciate having the data tables in front of me. That's really going to help me analyze the options. I want to make sure that we have the nonrecommended data tables as
well, so I can evaluate the Nonrecommended option as well as the recommended option in the Crown area. I look forward to hearing from the community. Our work is not done, but this
was a major step forward. Thank you so much for putting it out there, and I think we can show the values that we have in this county. Personally, I will be checking in with me, with myself every night and say, are
you standing up for the values that brought you to this board and why you're here? And as long as I can say, yes, I will be able to vote and feel good about that. So thank you so much. Thank you, mister. Miss
Sylvester, thank you. I just wanted to emphasize this final slide here. I'll have a lot of questions for our upcoming work sessions to digest all of this information and all of the options. I think we owe that to our community and make sure
that we get the best product that we can produce. And yes, it's a it's a work in progress. It's not going to be perfect, but we do want to get it right. Our community deserves that. So thank you for your hard work and look forward to continuing the conversation. Okay. And
I'll have the last comment then. This has been a long road. It's there was a lot of motion. This is the the largest, I think, in our history, the largest boundary study that Montgomery County has faced. As you all
know, I'm a product of this system, so I have seen this county grow. I grew up in the city of Gaithersburg when King Farm was a farm. That's how long when Crown was a farm. And
so I just want to say thank you to our staff, to our own staff, to Doctor Taylor for taking this on change. It's never, you know, it's never easy. I want to say thank you to the community for all the testimony, for answering all all, you know,
all the feedback that we have gotten. It's especially to our students. Their involvement has been very humbling. And I think those of us who ran for the
Board of Education, we did, because we truly care about the future of our county and we care about the children. And and we do it with care and with love, and that the decisions that we make are not unilateral,
but are decisions that we make holistically for the best interests of all our kids. So with that, we have a lot of sessions coming up. I hope everybody took a picture to see all the engagements that we're going to have. The next one is going to be Monday, February
23rd at 5 p.m. and thank you for the work. And I look forward to to being engaged fully. Anybody else? Okay. Doctor Taylor. All right. Madam President, we got a lot to talk about today because this is
also the season where we address the capital improvements program and spring amendments. I would like to invite our chief operations officer and deputy chief to carry forward today's presentation on spring CIP
amendments and more to come after that. Thank you, Doctor Taylor. If we could start the slides, please, and go to the second one. So this we're here to present the recommendation for the countywide elementary
boundary study scope. I'm going to start out next slide please. To talk about the why. And then we will talk about the scope a little bit more. Next slide please. So what's the need for
us to look at our elementary boundaries. So the purpose is going to be to make sure that we are being fiscally responsible and properly investing our funds where it's needed. And we were going to do that by looking at factors such
as the condition of our facilities, the how they're being utilized, how much are they being utilized, and then also looking at placing the current placement of our relocatable classrooms. And then the other need for this is
to address our declining enrollment, which we have been talking about for some time through policy, FAA criteria, the geographic proximity, demographics, utilization, and stability of student assignment over time, and then the other
need for us to look at is to to be able to review how we are serving our special education students, and are we able to serve them closest to their home whenever possible. And then we have already talked about during our recommendation
presentation about noncontiguous boundaries and island assignments. This is going to be an opportunity for us to look at those at the elementary level and do a cleanup, and then to revisit the paired school model, which is something else. We also talked about earlier in the
previous presentation. Next slide please. Just a quick reminder that all of our boundary studies are rooted in the board's policy FAA the criterias are demographic characteristics of student
population, geography, stability of school assignments over time, and facility utilization. If you could go to the next slide. So I'm going to go over quickly. The current and projected available seats
by level at elementary school level. Our projected capacity in 2032 is about 79,400 seats. And our projected enrollment. Well, let me go back to that capacity one one time real
quick. We have 137 elementary schools. So if we just flat divide the 79,400 number by our number of elementary schools, that's where you're seeing the average capacity at at elementary level of 580 seats.
And our projections right now are showing that we will have an available seats close to 13,000 at elementary level. And we also have 208 portables in our elementary schools. So this is this will allow us to look
at the enrollment across portfolio of our elementary schools, see where we can take, you know, be able to take portables off and then be able to, you know, rebalance the boundaries so that our, you
know, our schools are better utilized for at middle school level. We see something very similar. We do have a projected capacity available seats of almost 6600 seats at middle school level. The average
capacity that you're seeing over there is also, again, the total capacity divided by our number of middle schools. And that, you know, we still have a lot of capacity in our middle school. And this is something we would like to be also looking at as well as part of the study, the high school numbers that you're seeing,
even though it's not going to be part of the scope. I just wanted to go and and clear up the data that's presented at the table, the the projected available seats that you're seeing does include the seats at high school, number 27 at Crown Farm, including as well
as the the seats that are projected in the Woodward, as well as the expansion of Northwood and the expansion of Damascus High School. And it leaves us with about, you know, 6600 available seats is what that chart is showing. Next
slide please. So go over the for the scope and the process of the boundary study. I'll pass it over to Miss Soto. Thanks Adnan. So I want to walk us through a series of slides to talk about what do we envision or recommend the process being as we sort of
seen with the last two boundaries that are underway, if we want to consider school consolidation as a part of this process, which we do recommend, given the available seats that we have, and to be fiscally responsible, we're recommending that that step happen first. And we have some timelines for you to all consider in the
upcoming slides, we're recommending that we would consider both elementary and middle schools as part of that school consolidation, based on that previous slide where it showed how many available seats that we are projecting at both the elementary and middle school. And we would do that as sort of the first step. And once we know any of those
approved consolidations, we then would move into the formal boundary drawing of the lines. And that process, it's important for us to sort of know that step first, so that we're not sort of making multiple versions of it in the boundary. If we go to the next slide, please. We tried to
break that out. And again, we have some proposed timelines for you to all consider. So first up would be the preliminary assessment of facility utilization and condition. We need to take that all into account as we consider and identify potenti consolidations. We would then
gather community feedback on those potential consolidations. So that would be a separate process. The superintendent would come to you all with a recommendation on the consolidations, and the board would take action on those consolidations. If you would approve any, we would then take that into into the part of the
boundary study process. So we would assume after you've made that approval of one zero ten, wherever you land with that action, we would then start to draw the boundaries for the elementary and any impacted middle school. If approved, we
then follow the same process of the community feedback for those boundary options, very similar to what we've done for these two boundary studies. We draft the next round of boundary options again get additional feedback, and then we'd go through the superintendent's recommendation
and the Board of Education action on those boundaries, with the final step being implementation. Go to the next slide. We'd like to just review a couple timeline options with you. Next slide please. We have a recommended timeline. And then we have two options for
you to consider. And really the variation takes into consider, you know, how long would you like to take in the engagement process with the community? Both as both as we think about the school consolidation process and the boundary study option and then implementation
of that too. So our recommendation tries to balance between engagement option development and implementation. It does require what we're referring to as off cycle CIP sequence. So we are proposing that board action, should any
consolidations be approved would be in the May time frame. Instead. That gives us more time for public input on that consolidation as opposed to tying it to the march, which is traditionally what you all have done. And then the same would be true for the boundary study
approval, again recommending the action B that the policy allows us to do that. We just wanted to point out that that would be off the traditional cycle of the March approval within the implementation, giving us about 15 months for school year 2930. Option two
has two months less of engagement on the consolidation process, but two more months of implementation time. And option three is the longest timeline you will see and have implementation until school
year 2030 31, with one additional year for engagement. And that is why the boundary implementation would be a year later than the other two options. If we go to the next slide, we've just provided a few different timelines. If it's helpful to view it this way or in the summary slide, if
we go to the next one, it will show here. We're in February of 2026, where we're providing a recommended scope for you all to consider. We can come to you with a resolution in March, should that be a consideration.
And then this is the timeline that we shared on the previous slide. Just walking through when the development would happen. Solicitation for bid and RFP data gathering. If we go to the next slide, the timeline keeps going. Talking about first round of public
meetings and the feedback that would happen ultimately with a board decision for the boundaries being in May of 2028. If you go to the next slide, this is the exact same timeline. Everyone likes to view timelines in a slightly different way, so we just provided two ways for you to
view it if this is better. Again, same data as the last two slides. It just looks at it from a calendar perspective instead. So I'm not going to walk through it, but we thought it'd be helpful to give you two different ways. This is a lot of timeline and a lot of steps to think about. If we go to the
next slide, this is option two of that timeline. Just remembering that the engagement portion changes from the consolidation pieces versus the boundary. But the same implementation of school year 2930. So if we go to the next slide, you can start to see we're recommending that the
board action for this one because we're shortening the consolidation engagement would be in March of 2027. So next March. Next slide please. With the board action for the overall boundaries being in March of 2028, with an implementation beginning in
school year 2930. So again, the recommended option and option two have the same implementation start year. Next slide. This is the alternative schedule. Same information just a different way to look at it and aligns with the calendar year instead if that's helpful.
And finally let's go to the next slide. This is the third option for consideration. Next slide please. Where this one does extend out. So the board
would make a decision on the consolidations in March of 2028. Next slide please. And a decision on the boundaries in March of 2029 with a final
implementation being in 2030 31 for that school year. And finally ending with the last slide. That's just that final. So lots of lots of things for you all to consider. And both
the process and the timeline that you are interested in. When will we have to make a decision for a timeline? When
would we are recommending bringing the resolution to the March 2626 board meeting? Yes. So not in February. I think this is actually important for the public can give testimony during the public hearings that we just presented in the last presentation. So we think it's
important, and you all can ask us questions about this in the work sessions that are upcoming. But we would like to bring a resolution to the March 26th. Okay. Thank you, Miss Stewart. Can we go to slide eight? Yes,
please. Thank you. The first step is preliminary assessment of facility utilization and condition. So it seems that what's in our official book of
what the utilization is and what the capacity is, doesn't always match what's actually happening in the school with different programs. Just the way the school works. So I
think it's really important that we go into our elementary schools especially and capture that data. Like, for instance, even when my kids were at their elementary school, they had learning cottages that had been there since we started all day
kindergarten. And at certain points they didn't really officially need them, but they did use them for very good reasons. And so I just will that be part of the process to actually analyze the true
utilization and then make an assessment like for instance, maybe it wasn't being utilized efficiently, but maybe it is. Can I get some input? Yes. I think another good example would be like pre-K, you know, where do we still have half
days? Is there a desire to have full days at those sites? We need to take that into account. You know, as we are looking at the overall utilization of each of those elementary to make sure we have that dispersed across the county. Also, our new staffing guidelines and the way that will be sequenced,
because we have to get that part right. I am not interested in doing boundaries, and all of a sudden we get a lot of advocacy for additions. I think we all can probably agree we
are not looking into scheduling additions. We really want to take care of the buildings we have. So yeah, so that might take some extra work, but I think it's really important to get that right. Yes yes, yes.
So just to be clear on the timeline, because today we are talking about the timeline, the difference between the first option A and option B is in the end, it's the two months different one is being done in
March, one is being done in May. Okay. And then some differences in community engagement time. Can you move to slide ten please. Okay. Yeah. There you go. Yes. So the difference being in the recommendation by
moving it out to May, it gives us two additional months for both the consolidation process and the boundary study for additional community engagement. By making your decision in May versus the traditional march. Right. But the start time for implementation is still the same. Yes. That's sort of like
the last time that we would want you all to make a decision on, right before we get too far for us for implementation. Right. I do appreciate that we look at it systematically on
consolidation first, right, that that we sequence this correctly, that we have an overarching guardrails criterias. And before we we dive into the detail of reassignment. So I appreciate
that. Miss Montoya. Thank you. I just want to take you back to slide eight real quick. On the first one with the assessments, I know that the elementary school assessments were kind of ongoing. The last time we talked about them several months ago, I was just wondering if you had like a status update like X number
have been completed. We expect them all to be done by. Yes, I do, and for everyone's record and for the public's record, we're talking about the facility condition assessments that have been underway since the end of last school year. We have a little over 50% of those reports posted online across elementary and secondary. We
are closer to about 75% that have been fully assessed. Just takes the consultant a little time to write the report, but we will be complete with all of those assessments by the end of this school year. Okay. Thank you so much. That's great information for us to then use as part of this process. Thank
you. Okay, no more questions. Thank you so much for the presentation. Appreciate your work. All right. Moving on. Because we still have quite a few more items actually, Madam
President, just just one more significant item for the board's review. And the at the risk of adding a little bit of levity here, all of the previous items were really just an elaborate ploy to get the media here to witness us
talking about math. Yes, a very important topic. Keep the cameras rolling. Yes, this is what we do. Actually, this is actually super important. And and is actually something of significant magnitude. So thank
you to our media friends who are here today because we we are actually elevating some significant issues that are happening both in the state, the nation and here locally in Montgomery County. Today's presentation on mathematics focuses on key instructional
and system shifts that are required by Maryland's new mathematics policy and what those shifts mean for teaching, learning and student access across M.c.p.s. This is a huge deal. We will outline where our current practices must change
to meet new standards, instructional time expectations and pathway requirements, and how those changes are being guided by student data and classroom instructional conditions. The presentation today also emphasizes how mathematics instruction will
look and feel different for students through stronger tier one instruction, clearer coherence across grade levels, and integrated supports during core math instruction. Throughout the presentation, we will illustrate how M.c.p.s. Is aligning accountability,
professional learning, and school support to ensure policy driven shifts are implemented thoroughly and consistently with equity and access at the center for our students. One last little note about this. I have been deeply concerned
about where we were going as a system in mathematics since my arrival in July of 2024, we had a lot of great ideas on the table. We've discussed many of those great ideas, and it is actually fantastic to see those
ideas coalesce into a direction that is really going to not only improve performance, but also improve our students understanding of mathematics and set them up for life and to unleash their potential, handing it over to our Chief
academic officer and team. Thank you, Doctor Taylor. Good afternoon again. If you could go to the next slide, please. We are really excited about the upcoming changes to mathematics. And we want to begin by grounding the board and our
community with why this is so important and why it matters for mathematics across Maryland. The Maryland State Department of Education has updated math standards and increased instructional time expectations, signaling to all of us that
it's time to strengthen how students are learning mathematics. The traditional pacing and sequencing of courses has not consistently produced strong outcomes for our students, especially when it comes to long term success and equitable access to
advanced math. So our goal is straightforward and aligned with the state. More students demonstrating deep understanding, and more students having access to advanced pathways over time. Research and state guidance show that early acceleration
alone isn't enough. Students need strong foundations so they can thrive in rigorous coursework later. So in response, we are moving to a coherent pre-K through Integrated Algebra two, and I'll explain in a moment what
that means. Curriculum that in intentionally connects learning across grade levels. This approach builds depth, reduces gaps, and creates clear expectations for students and families. Rather than treating each course as a standalone experience, a new integrated
algebra two course reflects this more connected vision of mathematics, blending algebra, geometry and algebra two. This is not about lowering rigor or slowing students down, it's about strengthening this foundation so more students can
successfully reach advanced math. Ultimately, this change allows M.c.p.s. To improve outcomes and expand opportunities for every student. If you go to the next slide, please. This new math policy change is directly aligned to
Strategic Plan, our strategic plan with goal one higher academic achievement and growth for every student, and goal two meaningful post-secondary outcomes for our students. Next slide please. Student
performance data provide important context for this work, particularly when viewed across three year trends. So looking beyond a single assessment cycle allows us to see snapshots of student learning in areas where progress has been uneven or slower than
expected. The Maryland Comprehensive Assessment Program, or Ncap. It's our state assessment results help us understand to what degree students demonstrate their understanding of the grade level standards they've been studying throughout the school year. It's important to notice
that algebra one MCAT results on this slide are just reflecting the middle school algebra performance, and these are just middle schoolers who take algebra. Many since many of our students in M.c.p.s complete Algebra one prior to high school. As a result, these
data offer critical insight into the strength of students foundational learning before they enter advanced secondary mathematics pathways. Like others across the state, MCPs has seen uneven performance. To address this, Maryland has
adopted a new math policy, and I'm going to explain the components in that of that policy shortly. If you go to the next slide, just one more data slide. This data slide also shows our grade three five and algebra one. But as you can
see, the algebra one in the blue, all of the blue represent our students who are proficient. You can see the algebra proficiency number percentages different than the previous slide. This includes all of our students in M.c.p.s in middle and high school who take
algebra. And when we look at the this data, what stands out is not just the percentage of students who met proficiency, but also the orange, which is a sizable group of students who came very close. These students
who are on the cusp of meeting the state standards, they are 1 to 3 correct answers away from proficiency, which tells us that these students understand most of the required content. But there are gaps that are likely very specific and
targeted, and a new math progression that ensures foundational learning can help reduce these gaps. So it is definitely in order. Next slide please. So this visual represents how Msde defines a strong coherent math program.
The gray is the overarching goal advancing numeracy through consistent, clear and effective mathematics instruction for all of our students. And then the core components must also be in place to make this a reality. High quality instructional materials that ensure what
students are learning is aligned to the standards and taught with the intended level of rigor. A strong multisystem of support ensures that students who need additional time or targeted support receive it without being removed from grade level
learning. The system of school support reflects the role of leadership, professional learning, and coaching in helping teachers implement instruction effectively. Assessment. Accountability provide the feedback loop, helping us understand what's
working and where students are struggling and how we adjust instruction. So all of these components together will work for an integrated system. Next slide please. This work is about building a math program
that helps students develop deep understanding and confidence, not just the ability to move quickly through the courses. Success in math should mean that students know what they're doing, why it works, and feel capable. As capable as learners at the
secondary level, this also means redesigning the traditional algebra one geometry and Algebra two course sequence. Those are three courses that we have sequenced in M.c.p.s. And now we will move into what is called Integrated Algebra one and
Integrated Algebra two. That approach connects us all. All three of those courses, the traditional courses into those two and connects concepts across the years and reflects how math is actually used and
expands access to multiple advanced pathways after completion, rather than limiting options based on early course placement, students will continue to receive timely support and opportunities to move ahead through focused instructional time and strong
multi systems of support. This ensures that our students who need additional help get it, and students who are ready for enrichment or acceleration have the structured opportunities to do so. For families, especially in our pre-K through eight.
This also means being more intentionally engaged as partners in numeracy, development, clear communication, shared expectations and practical guidance will help give caregivers the support they need to support their child with math, learning at home,
and also understand how pathways remain open for their children. So we are really excited about this overall approach. Next slide please. One of the most significant changes is the requirement for the 60 minutes of daily math
instruction in grades K to eight. Just so that you have some context at the elementary level, we already meet that requirement of 60 minutes. Some even do a little more, but at the middle school level we're at about 45 minutes. And so that doesn't sound like a significant change, but it
actually is. So M.c.p.s. Will approach this shift through collaborative planning, engaging educators, families and the employee associations and community partners to ensure thoughtful planning has gone into that change. At this
time, I'm going to turn it over to Doctor Brandt. Good afternoon. Next slide please. Good afternoon, President Rivera-Oven, Doctor Taylor and members of the board. The Msde math policy calls for revising
the math standards from pre-K through algebra two. Next year, revised standards will be implemented in pre-K through grade eight. In the following years, the revised standards will roll out for the traditional algebra one Geometry and algebra two
sequence. With this rollout, students will transition to the new course sequence that Mr. Porter mentioned, integrated Algebra one and Integrated Algebra two. With this revision, we need to identify curriculum that aligns with the revised Maryland College and Career
Readiness standards and the core sequence through a request for purchase or RFP process, a high quality, appropriate curriculum and vendor will be identified. It will be essential that the vendor be knowledgeable about the revised
standards and partner with M.c.p.s. To revise their curriculum. Creating a cohesive math experience for all students from pre-K through Integrated Algebra two and that math RFP that is currently released actually closes
tomorrow. Next slide please. As mathematics transitions to an integrated approach for learning the standards of algebra and geometry, the course options after Integrated Algebra two are also changing. The cohort of students starting
Integrated Algebra one. In the 2728 school year will follow the pathway on this slide. Currently, Msde has identified an early framework for four advanced Mathematics pathways after the completion of Integrated Algebra two,
students may continue their mathematics learning in quantitative reasoning, data and data analytics. Algebraic foundations of Calculus and Statistics, and probability. These four pathway options will
require MCPs to reevaluate high school course offerings to ensure they align with the expectation of the courses within these pathways. However, we are awaiting the evaluation process due to potential revisions to these pathways from the state. Next slide
please. This is a slide you might have seen before the math policy and the transition to a new course sequence brings a lot of excitement. The transition also raises potential challenges and opportunities as students
entering the first advanced math course in the school year 2029 2030 will come from a range of course progressions. I would like to call your attention to the purple shaded cells labeled High School Course three. As you can see,
there are eight pathway experiences that students may take that lead to the first advanced math course. High School Math. Math course three at the exact same time. Next slide please. As instructional
expectations increase, the multi-tiered System of support, or MTS process becomes even more critical. MTS must effectively support both intervention and acceleration, ensuring students receive targeted support without limiting access to grade level
mathematics instruction. MCPs has worked closely with elementary schools to strengthen MTS structures and implementation, building shared understanding around data use, progress monitoring, and instructional decision making. This collaborative work gives
us confidence that with continued commitment, elementary schools are well positioned to meet the increased expectation of the new math standards and pathways. Currently, we're thinking about how we can apply what we've learned from elementary to secondary schools as well. Many
families and community members are most familiar with the M.C.P.S. MTS process we have implemented currently through the implementation of what we call Fit, that focused instructional time that we've spoken about earlier this school year. At the elementary
level, Fit reflects the school system's commitment to providing intentional time for that intervention or enrichment or even acceleration, and it serves as a strong foundation as we continue to expand and refine MTS practices across
grade levels. Next slide please. Implementing these shifts requires strong cross office support from the school system, as highlighted on this slide by our cross-functional teams work. This slide shows the ongoing support from our math CFT
instructional specialists. With over 1400 hours of direct math instructional support provided to date, this school year, professional learning, instructional leadership, development, coaching, and targeted assistance help ensure
schools are equipped to implement changes consistently and effectively. This spring and summer, professional learning will be rolled out for all elementary and middle school math teachers, English language development teachers, and special educators to learn
about the revised standards and new math curriculum. In addition, commitment to and professional learning for strong tier one instruction will remain a continued focus in all professional learning plans moving forward. A specific focus will continue
with the professional learning we provide to principals and school leaders during all instructional Leadership for School Improvement sessions, as well as professional learning for elementary math leaders, middle school math content specialists, and high school math resource teachers. Next
slidelease. Assessment tools and resources have been identified as a critical expectation in the curriculum selection process to ensure alignment among standards, instruction, and measures of student learning. To report on grade level learning and
numeracy development. Comprehensive diagnostic, formative and summative assessments are needed. Accountability will be shared across divisions to support coherent implementation and continuous improvement. This coordinated approach ensures
coherent implementation, consistent expectations, and continuous improvement while providing schools with the tools, guidance and support needed to respond effectively to student learning data. Next
slide please. The implementation timeline reflects a deliberate, phased approach. This sequencing balances urgency with thoughtful planning, allowing time for stakeholder engagement, curriculum selection, professional learning, and
school system readiness aligned to the state expectations. It's important to point out that much of this timeline is informed by the state of Maryland. Next slide please. Creating a partnership between Central office schools, parents
and community members is essential to increasing student achievement. Parents desire to be informed of their child's academic experience. In October, the outcome of the community meeting was to introduce the policy and give a high level
overview. In December, parents, community members and MCPs staff logged in virtually to hear about the shift in math standards and the new high school core sequence. Tonight, actually, we are virtually reaching out to the community
again to share an overview of the Numeracy development framework. If you need details of the meeting to participate tonight, check out the mathematics page on the website. The last Community Information meeting will be held in April to share more detailed plans
about the rollout of school year 2627. In addition to the community information meetings, there will be more opportunities for parents and community members to engage with the implementation of the math policy. A committee for the RFP process, which will
include M.c.p.s. Staff, parents and community members in the selection of a high quality instructional material is currently being developed as well. An instructional Minutes workgroup, which brings together staff, union partners, parents and community members,
will examine instructional time requirements and implementation considerations. Next slide please. In closing, Maryland's new math policy requires meaningful instructional and school system shifts. M.c.p.s. Is approaching this work with
clarity, purpose, and accountability. I'll now turn things back over for discussion. Thanks. But before, Madam President, you direct questions and comments from the board, I just want to emphasize how huge of a shift this really is. And
I joked about our media sticking around, but our cameras disappeared. So disappointing. Well, special kudos to our friends from from Bethesda. Bethesda today for for your support and hopefully
your reporting on this critical math issue. But and even though this is perhaps substantially less emotional than previous topics covered today, pretty emotional for me. It is. It is a a significant shift as a
school system, and maybe even more important in terms of the day to day work that we do. You you will hear from us again later this spring, throughout the summer and into the fall. As you can see, this is a four
year map laid out by Msde about steps that will be taking. This is something that we're going to have to come back to. I think it would be really helpful to for the board to to see some examples of like what what would be different in the courses from day to day. So we look forward to bringing some
of that back to you as well, and to highlight some of those differences for the community, as every parent today would probably reflect that their mathematics experience and the mathematics experience of their children seems wildly different.
And so we we certainly see it as our responsibility to elevate some of those changes and to give some concrete examples and some resources as we go along the way. So again, just want to elevate how significant of a move this is to thank Doctor Brandt and Mrs.
Porter for your presentation today. It's right on time and absolutely essential for us to make some big steps to improving student outcomes. Thank you so much, Taylor. With that, Miss Zimmerman, thank you. And I want to thank you for
putting everything together and communicating this way. I know that some of this is something that we've been looking to do as a district. It aligns with our strategic plan. I also acknowledge that some of this is led by the state. And my my point is that I understand that
not everything here is in local control, but I do want to ask about the things that are in our control. And when I look at students in third and fifth grade, right, that they're showing 50% or less of students being proficient in math, we
have a lot of students where the current math curriculum is not working. That's part of the reality that where we are, and I think this really speaks to the structure of supports in our day and how we're structurally supporting mathematic instruction. And
while we are right looking to that new curriculum, my deep concern is about the students that are sitting in our classrooms right now that will not get the benefit of that, that this decision is where we are. And I. They will still be
asked to adjust to these vast changes that are coming up for them. And I want to dig into those deeper to, I understand, might not be my my turn to ask too, but I really want to ask what supports are we putting in place for those students and how are we ensuring their
success? Thank you for that question. You know, there are a couple of things that come to mind. And I know you all keep hearing me talk about the cross-functional team instructional specialists, but those math leaders are in
schools sitting and talking with grade level teams. They're planning, they're in classrooms, modeling. So that's one support that is new for our school system this year. The other piece that this math policy really will, you know, drive us moving forward as a school
system is the process. And right now we have focused our efforts, the multi-tiered system of support. We've focused that system really on literacy. And when we were together, was it just last month when we were talking about literacy, we talked about,
you know, the shift to providing that same level of math support within that framework. And so I do believe that through the support that we're providing to teachers, through those math cross-functional team instructional specialists, and then really considering how students, because we don't want
to take those students out of tier one instruction. We keep talking the school year about the importance of, you know, tier one instruction, but providing a space for them to, you know, have the math interventions that we've focused, you know, again, primarily on those literacy interventions, you know, have
that math opportunity for reteaching, for intervention, you know, to meet the needs of those students who aren't, you know, at that level of proficiency. Right. And and I hear you on that. And I want to just elevate again that we talk
about fit time and how that is so essential. And it comes back to that same thing that we talked about last time, that it is only 30 minutes a day. And we are choosing to focus either on literacy or on mathematics. And my point to this is that we
have many students that would benefit from both literacy and math intervention, let alone the the qualified staff that is available to teach those interventions. And I am ready to implore that we have both a math and a literacy intervention. Time for our
elementary students. It is so essential for this development and filling in those gaps. Thank you, Miss Malu. I want to side myself with Mr. Herman's comments and along with that, I just wanted to elevate the idea of how this could influence
programmatic changes in the future. I know from my experience being in the Stem magnet program at Blair going into freshman year, you have the option of pre-calc A, B, C where they combine our pre-calculus course and our algebra two courses into one class so that you're prepared
for analysis later on. Since geometry now cannot be offered at the middle school level, then I hope that we can look at how that will look for a day to day life of a programmatic student. Thank you, Miss Montoya. This is very emotional for me. I have a fourth grader
and a sixth grader, and my sixth grader will be in the cohort of students experiencing the first year of integrated algebra, and not because of you guys, but sometimes the first pancake is usually a flop. So I'm not real excited about my kid being the first pancake, but it is what it is because
this is what the state is giving us. And so I echo the concerns of Miss Zimmerman in terms of our elementary school and fit. When my kids were in it, it was called when and they had flexibility. If your student needed math support, your student went in the win for math. Another student might
be in literacy for math. And then they would switch up. And now things are a bit more rigid, it seems, in terms of being forced to only look at literacy or not, in terms of what that particular child might actually need if they don't need literacy. Right. And so that kind of brings me to my question, because we do have a
lot of students who need supports. I look at the data and cringe and get sick just like everybody else. But we also have a lot of students who are advanced and they're in accelerated courses. And now we're shoving more math time at them to potentially accelerate them further. I guess I'm just
not really sure how this works for all of our students, right? It's very clear to me how we're going to support students who need intervention or additional support. Or maybe they're, you know, they're close to being proficient. And so we just need to kind of get them a little further over the over the hump there. And I want us to have
that, but we have to serve all of our students. And so I'm wondering how this impacts our students who may be in advanced classes, who may be in programs like Miss Malu, where taking those additional electives is a core component of that program. Or we're looking at these program models. That's the whole point of the program models kind of right. It's to
get these interest specific courses in there. And so how do we do this without completely changing their entire schedule? Because for some of those programs, having a block schedule where you're taking four classes, lengthier classes a day allows you to get the benefit of that program. So I
just want to make sure that we are not short changing other students and that we can come up with some creative ways. For example, maybe you do have a math block every day for 60 minutes, but you can still then rearrange your other courses in the block schedule the way that we've been accustomed. So that
is just something I'm very concerned about, and I hope it doesn't have to be now. But maybe in the future, hearing you'll have some answers about how we can make sure all of our students are getting their needs met. And the question I have for the community, and I'm a little unclear as well. We talk about proficiency all the time, but what does that even
mean is proficiency. You know, some kids can graduate with a 65% in a D in a class. And as a parent, I would be horrified. Right? So when we're talking about proficiency, what are we talking about here? Give me like a percentage on the rubric grade rubric. What does that mean? Yeah I mean I know
there's number scores but like what does that equate to. Ish. Right. If someone gets I think four is the highest. So obviously if someone gets a four we're like okay they're like in the A range. Right. But tell me when we're going down here. What does that mean. Well yeah. So there is a score from
the state that if a student scores a certain number, then they are the four range. I don't know what the percentage is in terms of A, B, C if that's what you're asking for a state assessment. Is that what you're asking? You know, as a parent I'm thinking about parents in the community. Right.
We get these these sheets. Honestly, it doesn't really make too much sense. There's like some three digit number on there or something. And you're like, okay, what does that mean? And I'll tell you, I've googled Google is not help you in that regard. And so when I see okay, say my child got a two, should
I be like, okay, well okay, they're doing fine. I don't need to worry. Now. If my child gets a four, I'm like, all right, I'm I'm good. I'm not worried about that. Right. But the other numbers are a little murky for me. And this kind of can even bleed into when they get a letter grade versus a test score. It's like you never
really know exactly where your child is at. Right? And so sometimes you can see it and I go, okay, they must be good. And then I see some assignments or something later and I'm like, wait a minute, right. So I'm trying to figure out how we let parents know what is proficient even mean. Does that mean you get it enough that we think
it's fine? But maybe as a parent I'm like, maybe I don't think you get it enough because I still see these other things. And so I'm not happy you got a two or a three. I c Mr. John's back here. Right. So similar to his head in agreement similar to our at the elementary level, we have what we call standards
based grading. Similar concept. If you are demonstrating proficiency, it means that you've mastered most of the content of that grade level. And same with the the assessments. If you are three, you've mastered, but I don't you're looking for a percentage.
Let me just say with I mean with the elementary school grading rubric, I mean, I have the same issues quite frankly. Yeah. What does that even mean to me? Right. There's letters there. Okay. Well you say they're demonstrating, but then I can see spaces where maybe my child is not demonstrating. So how is that accurate to me or I see okay. This is they're
proficient but I don't really even know. Does that mean they're they're barely getting a C proficient. And so maybe I need to give them some more support. Even if the education industry is saying that that counts for them as proficiency, because proficiency standard might not be the standard I have for my own child or quite frankly, for any other children
in the school system. So we will do a better job of clarifying what that means for our families. So when they get those reports that they understand what it means to be proficient and potentially provide some supports if they need right now to help families
better understand where their child is doing well and what areas they may be struggling with what we as a in the schools are doing to support the children. And then we are also working on some easy
things for families to be able to do to support children at home that will be able to provide families with as well. Okay, fantastic. And I'm really happy to hear the family supports because, you know, if we can help our children, but sometimes we don't know what to do to help them. So thank you.
Ms. Wolff I like my colleague Natalie. I understand this is a state mandated program, but I've been getting a lot of questions about even the use of integrated math as a curriculum. And my question is, a bunch of
states tried it, and then they went back to a different curriculum because it just did not work. So I'm wondering, have do we know why they didn't have success with it so that we could make adjustments from the beginning? And like my
colleague Natalie, I'd also be interested in what supports you're going to provide for these kids who are going to be the the first pancake, the first victims to be now I can so start studying it. I'm getting a lot of questions. And other than to say it's state
mandated, I don't know anything really great to say about it. So what's the answer there? What what are the what did the states find out? That that Maryland doesn't seem to know. I'll go first and then the team will will certainly help fill
in some of the blanks. And a lot of it relates back, I think, to our experience as math students when we were in school, and how the focus was very much on computational math. If I were to say something along the lines of y equals mx plus b,
hopefully everybody remembers that. That's the equation of a line, and it draws you back to algebra one days. And if I were to say something like pi r squared, you might start thinking about geometric shapes and circles and, and bring you
back to geometry and how this is very formula driven in, in our experience, you plug in formulas, you you learn how computational math is and then you create an output that is a
fundamental shift away from where we're where this is going today and where we have been going for the last several years with not great success. And so some of this, I think, is representative to of a generational gap of the methodology in which a group of
people learn something, and then how that group of people then has to teach the next group of people who are not learning it in the same way. And then there there are other aspects of this in terms of moving from a concrete framework to a theoretical
framework. And a lot of this is concept of number, concept of how the mathematics work, maybe less reliance on the computational aspects, subject matter experts. How am I doing
so far? Wonderful. But I still want to understand what what did New York find out when they switched back? Do we know? Do we know what? I don't want to call it a failure because I don't think they considered it a failure. I think they
considered it not working for their students. And I understand I've been getting a lot of questions from people here who say, this is not the first time. This is not new, really, and it didn't work before. So what do I say to people other than that the
state said we had to do it. I mean, we know that. Hi everyone. Jennifer Lesniak, supervisor for Secondary Mathematics. When we look at across the entire world the way people teach mathematics, we actually find that in many other countries they use an integrated approach
to mathematics. I would say that pre-K through eighth grade, we also use a more integrated approach to mathematics. In eighth grade, we learned algebra skills. We learned solving equations. We also learned geometry, and we also learned statistics. But when we
get to algebra one, it's only algebra one. And then we get to geometry and it's only about geometry, and then algebra two, only about algebra two. I would say algebra one and two also have some statistics. And so what the state is trying to do is regularly keep students
engaged in all of that for each year. I do know that you're looking at, you know, how do you get three years into two years, some of the geometry standards will are something that are carrying over from grade eight standards around
geometry. And so the task force that did this didn't feel that it was necessary for kids to continue going that next step with something they were really looking at. What does a kid need by the end of algebra two to be college and career ready? And so they decided to really
hone in on the major content that a kid needs to be successful. And those are the standards that kept that they stuck with and then created the integrated Algebra one and Integrated Algebra two. Our students will be going very deep into the mathematics, rather than learning a lot, a
little about a whole lot of information. And so it's an exciting opportunity to really think about how deeply our students will know algebra and how geometry and algebra really work together to solve more application aspects of
mathematics. Thank you. I think I read that same Wikipedia article that you did. So I do understand that the many foreign countries do this, but they also have a whole different education system from from how we do education. So
I'm just trying to figure out what success we think we can get. And what did we learn from other states that tried this. So thank you miss okay. So this is a completely new thing okay. We're all in it together. So as
a system wide accountability governance body I have one question. So first how are we going to evaluate whether this and when are we going to evaluate whether it's working. Second is is the state even
going to MCAT. You show MCAT. So when is the state is the state going to change MCAT math standard, and when would that be done? And how are we going to align going forward? Okay. Number one, as a system wide okay. Our goal number two as a
parent for M.C.P.S. one of the things I found very helpful is parent nine, which you are going to do tonight. Thank you so much that they gave me a pathway to say if your students do this for math dot dot, dot, dot, dot, this is the
trajectory. Will something be like that be available that can we have it or yes or is it not. Right now everybody is on the same step. So if it is not I would love to see. And I think that's important. That's talking about the parent part
educating the parents. What are some options for their kids. Right. Last part I associate myself with Miss Zimmerman's comment. I lived through the the implementation of curriculum 2.0. My child was
the first year to do that. Oh, okay. So that that so I really wondered the working with our staffs, you know like really you know, training is a new way of teaching talking. If if
that's the case, how are we supporting them so that when they in the classroom they are authentic, they are owning it because the kids can sense it so clearly when when the instructor is not owning the the content. Right. So lots of
questions and and three levels I'll start with the MCAT question. So students will continue after learning the standards of third grade, fourth grade, fifth grade, sixth grade, seventh grade. They'll continue at the end of the year to take that federal
accountability test, which right now is our MCAT. When a student if a I'll let's say that they go math six, seven, eight and then their integrated algebra one is a ninth grader, you won't take a test at the end of integrated Algebra one. You'll take it during the
middle way. Winter of that second course if you do this in high school okay, so a ninth grader takes integrated algebra and they won't take that May administration. They will take the administration in December of their sophomore year for
Integrated Algebra two. And it will be cumulative of where they've gotten to by the end of their. So they have to prepare. They have to actually digest two years of and take that test. Okay. If a student takes integrated algebra one while they're in middle school, every
middle school kid has to take some federal accountability exam. And so Msde is working to provide an exam for middle school students to take at the end of Integrated Algebra one. And when will all this be implemented? So next school
year are the standards k to eight. And so in 2627 I mean 2728 will be the first year of Integrated Algebra one. Those students who are in middle school will need to take it if when they get to the halfway point of Integrated Algebra two, they'll have to take another one as well. Okay, okay. So
they will do it twice. But this is in two years. That's when the exams come. Or one year for middle school two years for high school. Correct. So if you're taking it in 2728 as a middle school student, you'll have an exam that aligns to the
standards of that integrated algebra one course. And then integrated Algebra two isn't until the next year. And so then that plays into whether you're in middle school or high school. But that's kind of where they're going with things. You asked about pathways. We've
been talking about the different pathways. There are a number of pathways that students will go through, course sequences that kids will go through when they get to that post integrated Algebra two course, which we've called the first or high school math
course. Three. We've been working with content specialists as well as that's primarily who we've been working with and a little with the state of what's the best way for that transition in 2930 for students to be successful? Because some students will come
from that algebra one geometry, algebra two progression, which includes content that won't be included in that integrated algebra two. And so we're working through how do we best prepare students without saying, hey, you have to hold back a
year or you have to take an extra year of something else, but allow the students that pathway into pre-calculus if you wanted. So when we look at course level three, that third course at the end in 2930, a lot of students will land into precalculus and their
experience up to there will be very different depending on which course sequence you took. But we are well aware of this. We have had lots of conversations and we'll continue the conversation with math leaders as they bring back information from their teachers. Don't have one? Not you don't
have one yet. But but you have an idea. But you just know. You just wonder how to support them. But you do have the pathway chart available to share with the parents. Okay, Sheila is going to take the. Yeah. Good afternoon. I'm Sheila Berlinger
and I'm the elementary math supervisor. The other half of Jennifer. The. I'm going to pick up with the M cap question and the standards that are rolling out. So the new standards go into effect in August, and Maryland is adjusting the MCAT next school
year to be aligned. In fact, they just finished an RFP at the state level for a new partner to develop the assessment. So so it is it is coming in alignment. Okay. Wonderful. The last part of your question was about professional learning and
supporting teachers. I think what's really important to understand is that while there are changes happening to the standards, meaning there are some standards moving from one grade level to another, they're they're not all changing. It's
not all of a sudden it's a new body of learning and math. It is still an approach to teach students to understand how to use the math, to be mathematical thinkers. Conceptually, they're still going after most of the same standards in order to build to
an understanding of why we have procedures. But some of those standards are moving from one grade level to the next. The state is building modules for all teachers across the state to take grade by grade, so they can engage with their grade level standards and understand what's changed, what's stayed
the same, and what's new. So while there will be changes, they shouldn't be that drastically different in terms of approaches, pedagogy, expectations, models and goals. See, that's important. The approaches, pedagogies, you know, if those things can stay
where they are, then that is a that makes the teacher's job easier to adapt to the new standards. Okay good good good. Thank you. Mr. Yeah. Perfect. This is the slide. Just could you walk me through all this
information in real high level terms? What is what does this mean? I'll go across the first row to just make sure everybody understands reading it. So if this year your student is in pre-algebra or grade six
pre-algebra, that means they're learning the standards of seven and eight. Next year they'll go into algebra one. As a seventh grader. In the next year as an eighth grader, they'll be in geometry. And as a ninth grader in high school, they'll be in
algebra two. And then in 2930, they'll choose one of those core courses out of those four pathways. I'm going to skip to maybe like the most common, where is okay. So the most
common I would say is a student in Accelerated Math six is sitting as a sixth grader right now. We have many students in that course right now. Next year as a seventh grader, they'll take Accelerated math
seven and 2728. In eight grade, they'll be the first cohort of students taking that integrated algebra one. And then in ninth grade, they'll take integrated Algebra two. And as a 10th grader, they would take that
first high school course. A example of what that could look like is a 10th grader. The student could be taking pre-calculus as an 11th grader, calculus, and as a 12th grader multivariable calculus, dual enrollment. Or they could
choose another course from another one of those pathways to continue their rigorous mathematics experience in high school. Which row were you on? Accelerated? I did the accelerated accelerated seven integrated algebra and 12345 down. Gotcha. Okay. Okay. So
next steps community engagement. You're going to do a curriculum RFP for what grades. The curriculum RFP is for pre-K through eighth. And it closes tomorrow. So we will come back
with a new curriculum product for high quality instructional materials, a recommendation before the end of the school year. What will you use for the high school curriculum? We'll continue the change right now through next school year is for kindergarten through eighth grade. So it's really through
mathematics and eighth grade. We'll continue with our current algebra one and higher level mathematics courses at the high school level. And then we'll shift to that integrated algebra one, integrated algebra two, that following 2728 school year. Okay, so to answer your
question, Miss Silvestre, it is actually not just one but two operating budget requests that are associated with this. We do have an operating budget request that is tied to high quality curriculum materials for mathematics and K through eight for this upcoming year,
and that's what the RFP is that they're talking about. And then we'll be back again next year to talk about secondary to follow this progression. How heavy of a lift is this for teachers? Yeah, significant. And I would say it's
significant for teachers. It's significant for the teachers who support the teachers, which is why we've been really intentional when we're planning our professional learning for this summer to include our teachers, our special educators who are supporting that tier
one instruction for those general education classrooms, but also for our school leaders. So we're, you know, thinking about professional learning when it comes to principals, assistant principals at the elementary level, elementary math leaders at the middle school level, those content specialists, and then at the
high school level, the resource teachers. So really will take strong teams. Why is it such a heavy lift? Yeah, two things are coming together at the same time. The rollout of the policy,
which is changing the standards and adding expectations, including the numeracy development framework, in addition to the fact that we're going to likely shift products that will be used instructionally in the classroom, which may change the look of the math block. So new standards, standards, besides
what they're used to, and then a new product to learn. Okay. And then this is still the same math that parents have a hard time explaining to their kids at home. I think that hasn't changed. That has not changed. We're still we're still looking
for students to be those mathematical thinkers who can use the math to solve those problems. It's not just the procedural that so many of us learn. Mother, I, my children, will be able to explain it to their children. And one final question. So how does this
impact SAT as an external assessment? Will this be aligned with with that exam? Yes. Students after Integrated Algebra two are prepared to take the SATs. Okay. So let's
take a a side step on that for a quick second, because it's important to know that some of the fundamental principles have not changed. We you know, Pythagoras is not being unseated in in terms of
rheometry and, you know, the principles of algebraic expression and thinking are they're still there. All of those things still exist. How they are being conceptualized and how they're being applied is different. And that is that
is hard for a lot of both teachers and students to get their head wrapped around. And I'm going to be very candid with you. The expectations are raised because it is also a higher volume of proficiency that we're expecting in a shorter period of time. This is
a heavy lift. It's it's going to require a lot from the kids. It's going to require a lot from the teachers, and it's going to require a lot from the people who support the teachers, both the the administrative staff as well as the instructional support staff are
really going to have to up their content knowledge and understanding, in addition to their knowledge and understanding of the scope and sequence of how things go. You know, you may start the geometry course every year with
logic models, and you know, that may be what you do in August and September. I'm still right, aren't I? And that might shift. And you may be doing different things at different times. And when you go and observe and support a classroom, you may be looking at different
things at different times that you're not used to. And all of that is going to require almost unlearning and relearning a new system and a new approach. This is as seismic of a shift as can
possibly be, with old content and material being rearranged in this way. Stewart. Can you keep this slide up? Because I have just a couple questions. I
see that, well, from what you just told me, if you go through Integrated Algebra one and two, the next high school course is really meant to follow that sequence. So, for instance, it
seems like there might be a choice that the first two grade six pre-algebra, and then the next year they could do algebra one or Accelerated Math seven. But if they took the
Accelerated math seven, then they're in that pathway that we're moving towards. But if they took the algebra one they're in, they're out of the pathway. So would you be encouraged, children to take
the pathway or or is it just an individual decision? I think it's a conversation to have back with the students and the parents who the caregivers who are a part of their child's
educational experience, and to really decide if I'm in Pre-Algebra six this year, an option could be algebra one, algebra or geometry. Algebra two, and I end up at the same place. If I decided right now I'm struggling in pre-algebra,
so maybe continuing on an advanced accelerated pathway, we might need to rethink that. And so it's going to allow you in accelerated math seven, that second row, to really go deeper into some of those standards that you haven't yet solidified before going into the
Integrated Algebra one and integrated Algebra two, and it still gets you to the same place at the at the same time, right at the same time. And so it's really using data to see where students are and to make an informed decision for each individual student. So I think
that just needs to be laid out very clearly for families because I, you know, looking at this, you end up at the same place. To me, it makes sense to do the new pathway. But of course, it's an individual decision. And with your teacher
family. So the next question I have is somewhat similar. I see that there is also a pathway if you're in math eight and this
year, and then it goes to algebra one and then geometry algebra two. But if you took math seven and then math eight, it looks like you just go right into integrated algebra and
there's not that pathway available. So I'm curious why why did you decide to do it that way. So the math eight student is probably an eighth grader. We and they're going eighth grade. Math eight. Algebra one is a ninth grade. As a ninth grader, geometry is
a 10th grader, and algebra two is 11th grader. The student that's in math, seven is a seventh grader. And so the natural articulation after seventh grade would be to go into math eight. But at the next course, algebra will no
longer be offered as it is. And so the only option for you is integrated algebra one. Okay, that that actually makes sense. Okay. Each row is not. It's an individual pathway of where the student is today. This year in
their course. My one more question. After high school course three. And we had these choices. We have kids that are on a very mathy track. Right. So I had my kid. He doubled up
on math in his sophomore, junior and senior years. So he took, you know, pre-calc and statistics AP stat right. Will there be opportunities for that still? Could you could kids
pick more than one pathway? Yes. At the same time. Okay. And also now we're going to have more kids hit pre-calculus earlier it seems after will they have to take that that
math course for four years. Is that still requirement? Yes. All students will continue to have to take math every year of high school, as well as have four high school credits. I think where we hear a lot of question and wonder around that is the seventh grader who takes
integrated algebra one and in eighth grade takes integrated Algebra two, and then in ninth grade, they're in pre-calculus. Calculus as a 10th grader, multivariable as an 11th grader. And then what? So sometimes math and and yeah. So algebra
they some of them may decide to. Take dual enrollment. They may decide statistics AP statistics or continue other math options. I think, you know, being literate in financial having financial literacy is also important. So some students may
continue with another course. And my very last very quick question, if a parent is looking at this and thinking why? Why are we doing this? What can I do? I want to complain to someone. Who should they complain to us? Complain
to their state senators, right? Don't complain. Don't complain to us. Complain to the state. We'll give you the email. That's what I'm trying to say here. If they want to write someone, they can write the state superintendent or the state board. Well, Miss Stewart, I think it depends. If they
would like a sympathetic ear, that would be us or a not sympathetic ear might be somebody else to. To piggyback on a couple of comments, the the need for financial literacy is actually something that's highlighted in your strategic plan. And other organizations
out in the world also agree with you. As in recently, the College Board has even found this utility and amplified it as a as a future Advanced Placement course in financial literacy. So this leaves open an opportunity for financial
literacy. And that's there's some good news, right? You have to make an honor or AP level so they will take it. We're going to I think we have discussed this to death. Yeah I do have a question. Do we get any funding
for for this change from the state. No. Oh sorry. I had to turn my mic on. Louder, please. Louder. No. Okay. We we thank our friends in Baltimore and Annapolis, but. No. Okay. And I
just like to I know it's been a while since Mrs. Zimmerman spoke, but. And I know there's going to be community engagement. I would like to know what that looks like. Financial literacy. You know, financial literacy is important.
Math is important. I it's all important. What I struggle with is that we already have some kids who are not going to be able to benefit from this. And that's my, that's, that's that's what I struggle with.
And from some of the testimony we saw the other night, there was Amanda testified, and I'm sure you guys saw that, that broke my heart because it's it's pretty much too late, like trying to to fix that situation. It's too late. So I hope the
engagement with parents, we can find ways to communicate better as soon as you know. What does that mean? Proficient. Like what? What does it mean? Is it a one? Is it a two? Is it a three? Is there a two and a half? Like some of these things need to be clear. I know that
these this is a a situation where the state is asking us to do changes. But guess what? We can make changes that we can actually help to translate. Right? So parents are well informed where their children are at in what levels so they
they can be helpful. So looking forward to seeing what what the plan is. I don't know if you'd like to to say anything, Mrs. Porter. I was just going to say yes. So we do have two more meetings scheduled. Okay. We're
going to continue to have more community engagement throughout this entire process. We will certainly follow up so that families understand what their where their child currently sits in a class and what that means for them as they continue
through the the math pathways and what their options are. And we also are working on more communication for families for each particular student where they currently are performing,
what areas they're struggling with and what we are doing as a school about it. And and then we're going to be working to provide other family supports. So we are going to continue that. To your point about students who are kind of stuck in in this transition and maybe
struggling, we are also working with our schools through our specialists. Our cross-functional team members identify working with principals, identifying what standards and in particular skills students are struggling with, and using time to go in
and really address those particular skills. So fit time is not just for literacy. We also have some of that time for mathematics, and we're going to be working with schools to build more of that in as we as we move forward. Yeah, because they're both equally important. So I appreciate that. And the
clear that we can be to parents, you know, because we intend to talk at a level like this. And with I always say that I'm learning a new language besides Spanish. You know, the language like of M.C.P.S. So we can talk
plainly, directly and clearly to our parents. I think we all benefit from it, especially our kids. So thank you so much for your presentation. Appreciate it. All right, colleagues, well, if there is no further business
of the board, may I have a motion to adjourn? Motion to adjourn. Second the motion. Okay. All those in favor, please raise your hand. Thank you. Everybody. We wish you a blessed week, and we'll see you
next time. Thank you all.