Questions emerge as to why MCPS hired drug-dealing Drew elementary teacher given prior criminal history

[Anonymous]

They knew but just pretended not to know.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:They knew but just pretended not to know.

Correct. That is the MCPS way.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They should be doing yearly background checks on all employees.

And of parents! No parents with with DUIs or anything similar permitted on school grounds.

Yes, let’s screen parents before they can enter the school grounds. While we’re at it, why not extend this “ruling” to include speeding? How about failure to stop at a stop sign? How many people have a few drinks at HH and then drive home? Willing to bet many people are guilty of one of the above. While this teacher’s situation is extreme (and obviously unacceptable on every level), the idea that teachers should somehow be held to a higher standard of morality is ridiculous. Yes, a DUI is a huge mistake with potential harm but so is speeding. I agree that getting a second DUI or speeding ticket may indicate a pattern and should have harsher consequences but wrong is wrong whether you get caught or not. Let’s not forget that teachers make mistakes just like every one else.

[Anonymous]

It's wild to me that as a teenager, I had to take a drug test to be a lifeguard for Moco Rec department but never had to take one to be a teacher for MCPS. In reality, we'd have an even greater staffing shortage if they were to do drug testing.

[Anonymous]

We should ask all of the parents who moved their children out of her class.

[Anonymous]

There’s a teacher at Blake who came to work drunk and still teaches there. (She was reprimanded, but still at it!).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:There’s a teacher at Blake who came to work drunk and still teaches there. (She was reprimanded, but still at it!).

As a parent, I’d be willing to let a teacher have a one-time pass for an alcohol-based DUI incident, but only if MCPS had a mandatory, serious rehabilitation process for helping that person restore themselves before putting them back in front of kids.

But hard-core drugs like what Sarah Magid was involved with should be a one strike and you’re out scenario.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There’s a teacher at Blake who came to work drunk and still teaches there. (She was reprimanded, but still at it!).

As a parent, I’d be willing to let a teacher have a one-time pass for an alcohol-based DUI incident, but only if MCPS had a mandatory, serious rehabilitation process for helping that person restore themselves before putting them back in front of kids.

But hard-core drugs like what Sarah Magid was involved with should be a one strike and you’re out scenario.

She will be out now.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They should be doing yearly background checks on all employees.

And of parents! No parents with with DUIs or anything similar permitted on school grounds.

Yes, let’s screen parents before they can enter the school grounds. While we’re at it, why not extend this “ruling” to include speeding? How about failure to stop at a stop sign? How many people have a few drinks at HH and then drive home? Willing to bet many people are guilty of one of the above. While this teacher’s situation is extreme (and obviously unacceptable on every level), the idea that teachers should somehow be held to a higher standard of morality is ridiculous. Yes, a DUI is a huge mistake with potential harm but so is speeding. I agree that getting a second DUI or speeding ticket may indicate a pattern and should have harsher consequences but wrong is wrong whether you get caught or not. Let’s not forget that teachers make mistakes just like every one else.

Umm no. Speeding and DUI are not the same level of disregard for human life.
I drive 70 on the ICC daily. I’m speeding by law but we all know that’s a perfectly acceptable speed on the ICC.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:There’s a teacher at Blake who came to work drunk and still teaches there. (She was reprimanded, but still at it!).

Seriously? When?

[Anonymous]

All they had to do was a Maryland Case Search online. Takes 2 minutes.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:All they had to do was a Maryland Case Search online. Takes 2 minutes.

Which goes to show how inept and incompetent MCPS's HR and OSSI departments are.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Is DUI an offense for which they generally don’t hire? I have some experience with doing background checks for other employers and it’s shocking how common they are — I’m not sure they are disqualifying for any job except police and one involving driving as a job duty.

DUIs were enough to get the Wheaton HS principal removed from admin and placed on unassigned duty in HR.

If principals aren’t allowed to have DUIs, why should teachers?

That admin was already working for MCPS when those arrests happened. They didn’t remove her for DUIs that happened two years before she was hired.

This teacher should be fired, but I’m not sure her two arrests before hiring mean she never should have been hired in the first place.

I’ve never had a DUI, but I suspect there’s a fair number of people who work directly with children in some formal setting that had a DUI two years prior to hire. Would you fire them all?

And if that’s the standard for child endangerment, should we remove kids if their parents had a DUI before they even were born?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Is DUI an offense for which they generally don’t hire? I have some experience with doing background checks for other employers and it’s shocking how common they are — I’m not sure they are disqualifying for any job except police and one involving driving as a job duty.

DUIs were enough to get the Wheaton HS principal removed from admin and placed on unassigned duty in HR.

If principals aren’t allowed to have DUIs, why should teachers?

That admin was already working for MCPS when those arrests happened. They didn’t remove her for DUIs that happened two years before she was hired.

This teacher should be fired, but I’m not sure her two arrests before hiring mean she never should have been hired in the first place.

I’ve never had a DUI, but I suspect there’s a fair number of people who work directly with children in some formal setting that had a DUI two years prior to hire. Would you fire them all?

And if that’s the standard for child endangerment, should we remove kids if their parents had a DUI before they even were born?

I would be shocked if that were the case.

[Anonymous]

Did MCPS release official statement about this case? Or are we expecting too much from the largest school district in MD?