Roscoe Nix situation creates headache for Felder and Board

[Anonymous]

SOURCE: https://www.washingtonpost.com/education/2024/05/13/roscoe-nix-elementary-innovative-learning-program/

A decision to end an extended-year program at Roscoe Nix Elementary School in Silver Spring has frustrated some teachers who say they relied on the summertime salary.

The move, made amid budget talks and questions over the program’s effectiveness, was first announced in February. But administrators and a letter from the school board had initially indicated that a change would not come into effect until the 2025-2026 school year.

Fast, informative and written just for locals. Get The 7 DMV newsletter in your inbox every weekday morning.
The school later said there would be an abridged summer program this year, and teachers say that will require fewer staff members.

“We are in desperate need of help from you — help in the form of concrete actions, not words,” a group of teachers wrote in a recent letter to Monique Felder, interim superintendent of Montgomery County Public Schools.

Nix is one of two Montgomery schools that has offered the “innovative school year,” in which students begin the academic year in July and have about 30 days of additional instruction. Teachers who work in the program are paid a stipend, plus an hourly wage for the additional work in the summer.


Then-Superintendent Monifa B. McKnight’s initial budget proposal for the upcoming 2024-2025 school year had included money to continue the program. But the school board decided to revisit the funding during its budget talks. A February email sent to Nix staff and families from the board sought feedback for potential cuts to the program, effective in the “Operating Budget for the 2025-26 school year,” according to the message reviewed by The Washington Post.

The system says the initial email from the school board sent to staff and families seeking feedback on the program misstated the date for the possible cuts. The 2025-2026 date was probably a typo, Nichelle Owens, the school system’s Title I director, told The Post. Karla Silvestre, the school board president, said that she did not recall the February email mentioning the 2025-2026 school year and that board members made clear during budget talks that any changes would happen during the 2024-2025 school year.

After The Post sent a copy of the board’s email to Silvestre, Christie Ann Scott, a school board spokeswoman, said, “We recognize communication with employees could be more clear and constructive. We are working to improve communication about decisions that impact employees.”

Kind of confusing since I remember how vocal the advocates for ending the ISY calendar at Nix were, but essentially it seems like most parents were ok with the year-round program, even though a minority found it inconvenient enough to complain about it to the board. And also that many teachers are ok with ending the program, provided they're given enough time to replace the income they would've gotten from the year-round program.

That the board made a mistake in its email communications and didn't realize it is embarrassing. What is Silvestre doing over there???

[Anonymous]

Most did not want the Nix program. They had a ton of families and staff go to the BOE meeting and testify that. It sounds like a few teachers want if due to income.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Most did not want the Nix program. They had a ton of families and staff go to the BOE meeting and testify that. It sounds like a few teachers want if due to income.

Read the article.

The most recent evaluation did not include surveys of parent feedback. An evaluation from the 2021-2022 school year found that 71 percent of parents reported that the program “works for me and my family.” Sixty-one percent said they preferred the innovative school calendar compared with a traditional calendar.

So it sounds like, as is often the case with MCPS, that a loud minority dominated the conversation while the silent majority was not included in the conversation with the board.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Most did not want the Nix program. They had a ton of families and staff go to the BOE meeting and testify that. It sounds like a few teachers want if due to income.

Read the article.

The most recent evaluation did not include surveys of parent feedback. An evaluation from the 2021-2022 school year found that 71 percent of parents reported that the program “works for me and my family.” Sixty-one percent said they preferred the innovative school calendar compared with a traditional calendar.

So it sounds like, as is often the case with MCPS, that a loud minority dominated the conversation while the silent majority was not included in the conversation with the board.

Election day is tomorrow for BOE. Make your voice heard.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Most did not want the Nix program. They had a ton of families and staff go to the BOE meeting and testify that. It sounds like a few teachers want if due to income.

Read the article.

The most recent evaluation did not include surveys of parent feedback. An evaluation from the 2021-2022 school year found that 71 percent of parents reported that the program “works for me and my family.” Sixty-one percent said they preferred the innovative school calendar compared with a traditional calendar.

So it sounds like, as is often the case with MCPS, that a loud minority dominated the conversation while the silent majority was not included in the conversation with the board.

It's an article and no, because I cannot access it. If they wanted it to stay, they should have testified at the BOE or submitted letters. 2021 is several years ago. How about current numbers?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Most did not want the Nix program. They had a ton of families and staff go to the BOE meeting and testify that. It sounds like a few teachers want if due to income.

Read the article.

The most recent evaluation did not include surveys of parent feedback. An evaluation from the 2021-2022 school year found that 71 percent of parents reported that the program “works for me and my family.” Sixty-one percent said they preferred the innovative school calendar compared with a traditional calendar.

So it sounds like, as is often the case with MCPS, that a loud minority dominated the conversation while the silent majority was not included in the conversation with the board.

It's an article and no, because I cannot access it. If they wanted it to stay, they should have testified at the BOE or submitted letters. 2021 is several years ago. How about current numbers?

Oh article is posted. A few teachers are tantruming because they are losing their summer income. That does not speak for the majority.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Most did not want the Nix program. They had a ton of families and staff go to the BOE meeting and testify that. It sounds like a few teachers want if due to income.

Read the article.

The most recent evaluation did not include surveys of parent feedback. An evaluation from the 2021-2022 school year found that 71 percent of parents reported that the program “works for me and my family.” Sixty-one percent said they preferred the innovative school calendar compared with a traditional calendar.

So it sounds like, as is often the case with MCPS, that a loud minority dominated the conversation while the silent majority was not included in the conversation with the board.

It's an article and no, because I cannot access it. If they wanted it to stay, they should have testified at the BOE or submitted letters. 2021 is several years ago. How about current numbers?

Oh article is posted. A few teachers are tantruming because they are losing their summer income. That does not speak for the majority.

Over 50 teachers is more than a few.

[Anonymous]

Did the extra school days result in better academic performance? If yes, then it's worth it. Cut central office spending, maybe don't keep hiring expensive consultants to do useless audits like the racism audit. You know what would help poor black/brown kids more than a racist audit? Better and more instruction.

If it isn't working, then cut it. Waste of money, like the racism audit.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Did the extra school days result in better academic performance? If yes, then it's worth it. Cut central office spending, maybe don't keep hiring expensive consultants to do useless audits like the racism audit. You know what would help poor black/brown kids more than a racist audit? Better and more instruction.

If it isn't working, then cut it. Waste of money, like the racism audit.

Can you people please read? It's in the quoted excerpt in this thread if you're too lazy to click the link.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Did the extra school days result in better academic performance? If yes, then it's worth it. Cut central office spending, maybe don't keep hiring expensive consultants to do useless audits like the racism audit. You know what would help poor black/brown kids more than a racist audit? Better and more instruction.

If it isn't working, then cut it. Waste of money, like the racism audit.

Can you people please read? It's in the quoted excerpt in this thread if you're too lazy to click the link.

For those wondering if the full-year calendar netted out in any improvement in learning:

The cut to the Nix program comes after an evaluation released by the Montgomery school system in August found that despite the extra days in the classroom, the program “did not have a detectable effect on student reading and mathematics performance by year end.” Several parents and teachers at Nix began speaking out against the program, referring to that finding from the evaluation. The evaluation recommended that the program remain intact for another year.

Parents at Arcola Elementary School, meanwhile, advocated keeping the program.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Did the extra school days result in better academic performance? If yes, then it's worth it. Cut central office spending, maybe don't keep hiring expensive consultants to do useless audits like the racism audit. You know what would help poor black/brown kids more than a racist audit? Better and more instruction.

If it isn't working, then cut it. Waste of money, like the racism audit.

No, it didn't. Go watch the BOE meeting. It's on their website or youtube. Forget which one.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Most did not want the Nix program. They had a ton of families and staff go to the BOE meeting and testify that. It sounds like a few teachers want if due to income.

Read the article.

The most recent evaluation did not include surveys of parent feedback. An evaluation from the 2021-2022 school year found that 71 percent of parents reported that the program “works for me and my family.” Sixty-one percent said they preferred the innovative school calendar compared with a traditional calendar.

So it sounds like, as is often the case with MCPS, that a loud minority dominated the conversation while the silent majority was not included in the conversation with the board.

It's an article and no, because I cannot access it. If they wanted it to stay, they should have testified at the BOE or submitted letters. 2021 is several years ago. How about current numbers?

Oh article is posted. A few teachers are tantruming because they are losing their summer income. That does not speak for the majority.

Over 50 teachers is more than a few.

Ok, then they should have been at the BOE meeting. They are upset over losing summer income. Thats unfortunate but not a good enough reason to force families to summer school who don't want it.

[Anonymous]

When they disaggregated the results, there were improvements at Arcola but not at Nix. But the real issue is that the board/MCPS made a dumb typo. But the teachers were also dumb for not noticing that what was being discussed was not the same as was written and asking for clarification. ESH.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Most did not want the Nix program. They had a ton of families and staff go to the BOE meeting and testify that. It sounds like a few teachers want if due to income.

Read the article.

The most recent evaluation did not include surveys of parent feedback. An evaluation from the 2021-2022 school year found that 71 percent of parents reported that the program “works for me and my family.” Sixty-one percent said they preferred the innovative school calendar compared with a traditional calendar.

So it sounds like, as is often the case with MCPS, that a loud minority dominated the conversation while the silent majority was not included in the conversation with the board.

It's an article and no, because I cannot access it. If they wanted it to stay, they should have testified at the BOE or submitted letters. 2021 is several years ago. How about current numbers?

Oh article is posted. A few teachers are tantruming because they are losing their summer income. That does not speak for the majority.

Over 50 teachers is more than a few.

Ok, then they should have been at the BOE meeting. They are upset over losing summer income. Thats unfortunate but not a good enough reason to force families to summer school who don't want it.

I agree. But also, I don't think they're mad at the year-round calendar going away. They're more mad that they were initially told they'd have more time to prepare for it going away.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Most did not want the Nix program. They had a ton of families and staff go to the BOE meeting and testify that. It sounds like a few teachers want if due to income.

Read the article.

The most recent evaluation did not include surveys of parent feedback. An evaluation from the 2021-2022 school year found that 71 percent of parents reported that the program “works for me and my family.” Sixty-one percent said they preferred the innovative school calendar compared with a traditional calendar.

So it sounds like, as is often the case with MCPS, that a loud minority dominated the conversation while the silent majority was not included in the conversation with the board.

It's an article and no, because I cannot access it. If they wanted it to stay, they should have testified at the BOE or submitted letters. 2021 is several years ago. How about current numbers?

Oh article is posted. A few teachers are tantruming because they are losing their summer income. That does not speak for the majority.

Over 50 teachers is more than a few.

Ok, then they should have been at the BOE meeting. They are upset over losing summer income. Thats unfortunate but not a good enough reason to force families to summer school who don't want it.

I agree. But also, I don't think they're mad at the year-round calendar going away. They're more mad that they were initially told they'd have more time to prepare for it going away.

Prepare for what. It was announced at the BOE meeting and they should have started their job search then.