Board of Education meeting Aug 21 2025

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The woman responsible for reading out and explaining the board's legislative priorities is painful to listen to. Is there no one else within the BOE ecosystem who is competent and capable that could've done this job?

She's fine. It's literally her job.

She's not, but if you're happy with this BOE I know your standards are low.

Are you running in the next election?

Are you?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The woman responsible for reading out and explaining the board's legislative priorities is painful to listen to. Is there no one else within the BOE ecosystem who is competent and capable that could've done this job?

She's fine. It's literally her job.

She's not, but if you're happy with this BOE I know your standards are low.

Are you running in the next election?

Are you?

You're the one complaining. Step up to the plate!

[Anonymous]

I'm concerned about Taylor. Laura Stewart is asking for a slower transition, and Taylor turned that down flat. Key information about transportation costs are now unknowable, per Taylor's comments. The chief academic officer is sure we have all the expertise we need among current educators to duplicate programs regionally. Educators and the community think that isn't the case. Professional education has not been addressed at all; The Chief Academic Officer admitted she wasn't sure what teachers had which expertise and she didn't know which schools they were located in. I wish Taylor could exhibit more flexibility.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I'm concerned about Taylor. Laura Stewart is asking for a slower transition, and Taylor turned that down flat. Key information about transportation costs are now unknowable, per Taylor's comments. The chief academic officer is sure we have all the expertise we need among current educators to duplicate programs regionally. Educators and the community think that isn't the case. Professional education has not been addressed at all; The Chief Academic Officer admitted she wasn't sure what teachers had which expertise and she didn't know which schools they were located in. I wish Taylor could exhibit more flexibility.

The Chief Academic Officer embarrassingly had her butt kicked by Julie Yang on the issue of the contract they declined to approve for surveying students on AP/IB testing. I don't think she's ready for the role she took on.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm concerned about Taylor. Laura Stewart is asking for a slower transition, and Taylor turned that down flat. Key information about transportation costs are now unknowable, per Taylor's comments. The chief academic officer is sure we have all the expertise we need among current educators to duplicate programs regionally. Educators and the community think that isn't the case. Professional education has not been addressed at all; The Chief Academic Officer admitted she wasn't sure what teachers had which expertise and she didn't know which schools they were located in. I wish Taylor could exhibit more flexibility.

The Chief Academic Officer embarrassingly had her butt kicked by Julie Yang on the issue of the contract they declined to approve for surveying students on AP/IB testing. I don't think she's ready for the role she took on.

I'm curious, do folks have a sense of if it's her or Taylor driving the bus on the program analysis? Clearly they are both on board but I wonder who is really driving it.

[Anonymous]

Jeannie Franklin LIED through her teeth about the Regional IB programs and their outcomes. The teacher training for those teachers is NOT on par with Richard Montgomery's and the outcomes are NOT the same. The number of kids graduating with the IB diploma at Watkins Mill, Springbrook and Kennedy is not the same as RM. That is an on-the-record lie.

[Anonymous]

Shouldn't it be a conflict of interest for Karla Silvestre to be evangelizing and pushing dual enrollment during board meetings as she did during the program analysis Q&A, given her role with Montgomery College?

[Anonymous]

Every question the board had on the regional programs analysis Niki Porter (formerly Hazel) answered that it was a great point and that they'd look into it.

So what critical thinking and scenario planning did this woman do? Because it's alarming for her to have this many uncertainties about this stuff at this stage in the game.

[Anonymous]

Grace Rivera-Oven asking about if MCPS has considered geothermal HVAC solutions after that EXACT question was asked earlier and the poor facilities lady from Andrea Swaitocha from facilities had to point that out to her just shows how poorly these BOE members listen and pay attention during these meetings.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Jeannie Franklin LIED through her teeth about the Regional IB programs and their outcomes. The teacher training for those teachers is NOT on par with Richard Montgomery's and the outcomes are NOT the same. The number of kids graduating with the IB diploma at Watkins Mill, Springbrook and Kennedy is not the same as RM. That is an on-the-record lie.

And she bluntly blamed the regional IB failure to the existence of RMIB.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Shouldn't it be a conflict of interest for Karla Silvestre to be evangelizing and pushing dual enrollment during board meetings as she did during the program analysis Q&A, given her role with Montgomery College?

You are on to something

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Every question the board had on the regional programs analysis Niki Porter (formerly Hazel) answered that it was a great point and that they'd look into it.

So what critical thinking and scenario planning did this woman do? Because it's alarming for her to have this many uncertainties about this stuff at this stage in the game.

Ah..."look into it" Board meetings. Who will look into it? Who will FOLLOWUP? When should stakeholders expect the follow-up?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm concerned about Taylor. Laura Stewart is asking for a slower transition, and Taylor turned that down flat. Key information about transportation costs are now unknowable, per Taylor's comments. The chief academic officer is sure we have all the expertise we need among current educators to duplicate programs regionally. Educators and the community think that isn't the case. Professional education has not been addressed at all; The Chief Academic Officer admitted she wasn't sure what teachers had which expertise and she didn't know which schools they were located in. I wish Taylor could exhibit more flexibility.

The Chief Academic Officer embarrassingly had her butt kicked by Julie Yang on the issue of the contract they declined to approve for surveying students on AP/IB testing. I don't think she's ready for the role she took on.

I'm curious, do folks have a sense of if it's her or Taylor driving the bus on the program analysis? Clearly they are both on board but I wonder who is really driving it.

Taylor is definitely driving the bus. In fact, he seems to be sitting quite comfortably on his throne.

[Anonymous]

Are we really to believe that this is just gross negligence? Because this is what corruption looks like in real time. Follow the money.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Shouldn't it be a conflict of interest for Karla Silvestre to be evangelizing and pushing dual enrollment during board meetings as she did during the program analysis Q&A, given her role with Montgomery College?

You are on to something

There is that. But I think that Silvestre is just trying to come up with some way to reintroduce rigor that the superintendent is removing from the system.

I don't believe that MC has the capacity to take on so many students at once. And, it's depressing to hear people suggest remote learning as a solution.