How big a deal are the recent teacher involuntary transfers?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’m a teacher who moved to MCPS from a supposedly worse school district and I have not been impressed by MCPS at all.
Perhaps it used to be better?

MCPS has been struggling in them last ten to fifteen years as suburban poverty has increased. That combined with the NIMBY reactions you read here about redistributing having really tied the hands of MCPS.

We have gone through a lot of admin changes with a huge focus on equity, but to be honest no one can really prove it has made an impact on anything. At this point most staff just put up with the constantly shifting initiatives without caring about them. New verbiage is thrown at us every two years and then we move on without ever hearing about it again. (The new one is Leader in Me.)

I will say that I rarely run into bad teachers. Usually they are found in the electives. I can’t say I have liked all my admin. Most seem like they are just waiting for their next promotion, in the meantime their main goal is just keeping parents happy, not teachers.

What we have seen is a definite drop in academic standards (no finals, no attendance requirements, 50% rule and retakes abused), and student accountability. This is an attempt to keep graduation rates as high as possible, but it has demoralized the teaching force to know that what we teach doesn’t really matter since the students move ahead no matter what.

My prior school system (FCPS, MD) also has all these issues, so it is not just a MCPS thing. But teachers have realized that there isn’t really any respect in education anymore. It has gotten worse and worse since the 80’s. These factors are making college students move away from considering teaching. Also, the starting salaries are too low across the U.S. especially if someone has student loans. Even in well paying districts like MCPS it is not enough to make up for the high cost of living unless you can live with roommates/family for the first few years.

Weird I thought Leader in me was so wonderful!

What do you think was wonderful about it? Can you explain how you feel that it was an effective program for our students?

Everything! It was so inspiring. I think the kids will really benefit, and although I think this is a fine program for what it is, I'd prefer schools not to focus on SEL but academics.

You are an incredibly sensitive person, who inspires joy-joy feelings in all those around you!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’m a teacher who moved to MCPS from a supposedly worse school district and I have not been impressed by MCPS at all.
Perhaps it used to be better?

MCPS has been struggling in them last ten to fifteen years as suburban poverty has increased. That combined with the NIMBY reactions you read here about redistributing having really tied the hands of MCPS.

We have gone through a lot of admin changes with a huge focus on equity, but to be honest no one can really prove it has made an impact on anything. At this point most staff just put up with the constantly shifting initiatives without caring about them. New verbiage is thrown at us every two years and then we move on without ever hearing about it again. (The new one is Leader in Me.)

I will say that I rarely run into bad teachers. Usually they are found in the electives. I can’t say I have liked all my admin. Most seem like they are just waiting for their next promotion, in the meantime their main goal is just keeping parents happy, not teachers.

What we have seen is a definite drop in academic standards (no finals, no attendance requirements, 50% rule and retakes abused), and student accountability. This is an attempt to keep graduation rates as high as possible, but it has demoralized the teaching force to know that what we teach doesn’t really matter since the students move ahead no matter what.

My prior school system (FCPS, MD) also has all these issues, so it is not just a MCPS thing. But teachers have realized that there isn’t really any respect in education anymore. It has gotten worse and worse since the 80’s. These factors are making college students move away from considering teaching. Also, the starting salaries are too low across the U.S. especially if someone has student loans. Even in well paying districts like MCPS it is not enough to make up for the high cost of living unless you can live with roommates/family for the first few years.

I'm a former MCPS admin who retired early last year because I couldn't take the BS any longer. PP has hit on so many key issues. First of all, the constant changes are just too much and not well thought out. It's almost as if central recognizes a problem and then just throws shit at the wall and hope that it sticks without any forward thinking of how it will play out. Barriers aren't anticipated and when they arise everyone just shrugs their shoulders and tells schools to make it work. I sat in a meeting last year where we as elementary admin were told to increase the amount of time we spend teaching SS and science. Of course, we would love to be able to do that. However, when we pulled up the scheduling document and added up the total minutes allocated for subject areas in a day we had to explain to central that our school day is too short in order to teach every content area for the prescribed amount of time. How does central office make a document dictating how long we should spend on math, reading, etc. without realizing that the total times is longer than our given school day? Then they get mad at us for not being receptive to the message. Ummm...WTF?

We have also spent years trying to do professional learning around equity without much support. When ou look at the student performance data and it hasn't moved the needle. We can't say that we're a school system dedicated to equity when schools are just left out on their own as islands without TRAINED equity professionals there to help design and lead the work. There are Learning and Achievement Specialists that can come out and support schools but what are their qualifications? How are they more qualified than school staff to design equity PD? Most I've met are either former classroom teachers or SDTs who wanted a yearlong position outside of admin. They don't have specific training that qualifies them to lead the work. A self-paced 20-minute module produced by someone in the equity office isn't going to cut it. Furthermore, who deems the staff in the equity office to be experts? What are their credentials in that area? The same could be said for the push to be a RJ district. Where's the training? My friends told me that RJ is a 10 or 20 min. self-paced module this summer for staff. How does this experience justify being able to call us a RJ district?
I believe all staff shows up each day to do right by kids. Sure, there are teachers with skill or will gaps but we can work on those if they're willing to meet us halfway. Most of the time, teachers will improve when provided with the appropriate supports. I have had to take one teacher through the complete PAR process where they ended up being fired. I don't feel bad about it because they weren't good for students.

In terms of teacher performance, I truly believe that most staff are well-intended and show up each day to do right by kids. Realistically, I had a few teachers each year that required additional support and coaching from our RS or SDT. Some years someone would end up on a growth plan, but most could turn it around. I did have one teacher I had to take through the entire process to get dismissed. They weren't good for students and should not have been in a classroom. They were a lemon that was involuntarily transferred to us, and it was mind-blowing to me that they had come this far without being put on PAR.

Student accountability is another area in which we started moving backwards. Nobody fails and very few are ever retained. Report card grades are meaningless at the elementary level due to standards-based grading. We tell teachers to give multiple attempts for students to show proficiency on a task. If a student doesn't complete an assignment, they can't be given a D. Teachers have to just leave the grade blank. Therefore, it's feasible for a student to get an A or a B in a subject while only doing half of the required assignments. How is that teaching students to take responsibility or pride in their own work?

Don't even get me started on student behavior and how little say admin has in issuing consequences to students. Teachers are dealing with insane behaviors in their classrooms, and we are rarely allowed to suspend a student. I don't necessarily think suspension is the go-to solution because I feel kids need to be in school. However, when a student is chronically disruptive or violent, we need to be able to suspend without begging our directors to give us permission. That's not to say we wouldn't be trying to work with the student and their family to determine the cause of the behavior and explore an FBA and BIP. Just writing this has me shaking my head...good luck to all MCPS staff this year. I'm hoping it's a smoother year than those of the past.

This Restorative Justice crap is what is pushing many teachers out of the classroom.

Nonsense, retorative justice works in most cases. It's morons who spout off about things they know nothing about that are driving off teachers.

No, RJ just punishes the victim and encourages further disruptive behavior because there are never any consequences.

You seem to be confused. RJ is the only thing that has ever worked.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3frw4jfhDP4

Board meeting from yesterday.
They start talking about the transfers at 1:01:00

She mentions the transfer process happening though July, but that ignores that teachers are required to be notified at the end of February.

She did. She stated around 1:06 that there are two seasons for transfers, one in March and July and we are still in the month of July.

DP
I’d like her to point out where that is in the contract. I’m not an MCEA teacher, but I’ve looked at the contract linked in this thread. It seems as though what she is saying perhaps falls more under voluntary transfers, or the placement of those who were involuntary transferred and should have been notified earlier (I read the third Friday of March).



Which part is the superintendent referencing? https://www.montgomeryschoolsmd.org/uploadedFiles/departments/associationrelations/MCEA_Contract.pdf

I agree. I would like to see where this is in the contract. Historically, even before Covid, teachers were informed in March that they were to be involuntarily transferred. Anyone who did not get a job offer during the first round of transfers would be placed in a position. This was completed before the end of the school year. The next ¨round¨ of transfers were people voluntarily interviewing for different positions. The last week of July, that would stop as principals needed to make final plans for start of school.

I also want to know why such a big shift could not be anticipated. Are we moving to an ¨oh well, it is not ideal but it is the best we can do, shoulder shrug¨ culture? If we do not believe we can do better, then we will not try to do better. There are so many areas in which MCPS could do better for everyone. This is just one of those many situations.

+1
The superintendent says, “This isn’t new” and that it’s doesn’t break the contract, so that’s it? Cite the specific section from the bargaining agreement.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3frw4jfhDP4

Board meeting from yesterday.
They start talking about the transfers at 1:01:00

She mentions the transfer process happening though July, but that ignores that teachers are required to be notified at the end of February.

She did. She stated around 1:06 that there are two seasons for transfers, one in March and July and we are still in the month of July.

DP
I’d like her to point out where that is in the contract. I’m not an MCEA teacher, but I’ve looked at the contract linked in this thread. It seems as though what she is saying perhaps falls more under voluntary transfers, or the placement of those who were involuntary transferred and should have been notified earlier (I read the third Friday of March).



Which part is the superintendent referencing? https://www.montgomeryschoolsmd.org/uploadedFiles/departments/associationrelations/MCEA_Contract.pdf

I agree. I would like to see where this is in the contract. Historically, even before Covid, teachers were informed in March that they were to be involuntarily transferred. Anyone who did not get a job offer during the first round of transfers would be placed in a position. This was completed before the end of the school year. The next ¨round¨ of transfers were people voluntarily interviewing for different positions. The last week of July, that would stop as principals needed to make final plans for start of school.

I also want to know why such a big shift could not be anticipated. Are we moving to an ¨oh well, it is not ideal but it is the best we can do, shoulder shrug¨ culture? If we do not believe we can do better, then we will not try to do better. There are so many areas in which MCPS could do better for everyone. This is just one of those many situations.

+1
The superintendent says, “This isn’t new” and that it’s doesn’t break the contract, so that’s it? Cite the specific section from the bargaining agreement.

The Superintendent knows it's not allowed by the contract. She just doesnt care. She already had a vote of no confidence from staff.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3frw4jfhDP4

Board meeting from yesterday.
They start talking about the transfers at 1:01:00

She mentions the transfer process happening though July, but that ignores that teachers are required to be notified at the end of February.

She did. She stated around 1:06 that there are two seasons for transfers, one in March and July and we are still in the month of July.

DP
I’d like her to point out where that is in the contract. I’m not an MCEA teacher, but I’ve looked at the contract linked in this thread. It seems as though what she is saying perhaps falls more under voluntary transfers, or the placement of those who were involuntary transferred and should have been notified earlier (I read the third Friday of March).



Which part is the superintendent referencing? https://www.montgomeryschoolsmd.org/uploadedFiles/departments/associationrelations/MCEA_Contract.pdf

I agree. I would like to see where this is in the contract. Historically, even before Covid, teachers were informed in March that they were to be involuntarily transferred. Anyone who did not get a job offer during the first round of transfers would be placed in a position. This was completed before the end of the school year. The next ¨round¨ of transfers were people voluntarily interviewing for different positions. The last week of July, that would stop as principals needed to make final plans for start of school.

I also want to know why such a big shift could not be anticipated. Are we moving to an ¨oh well, it is not ideal but it is the best we can do, shoulder shrug¨ culture? If we do not believe we can do better, then we will not try to do better. There are so many areas in which MCPS could do better for everyone. This is just one of those many situations.

+1
The superintendent says, “This isn’t new” and that it’s doesn’t break the contract, so that’s it? Cite the specific section from the bargaining agreement.

The Superintendent knows it's not allowed by the contract. She just doesnt care. She already had a vote of no confidence from staff.

+1 It’s just another example of MCPS administrators misrepresenting a document to justify the outcome. The callousness of disregarding the hardship a teacher endures when the work location is changed on short notice is another reason why teachers have no confidence in the Superintendent. Seriously, who wants to work for an employer who treats staff in such manner?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3frw4jfhDP4

Board meeting from yesterday.
They start talking about the transfers at 1:01:00

She mentions the transfer process happening though July, but that ignores that teachers are required to be notified at the end of February.

She did. She stated around 1:06 that there are two seasons for transfers, one in March and July and we are still in the month of July.

DP
I’d like her to point out where that is in the contract. I’m not an MCEA teacher, but I’ve looked at the contract linked in this thread. It seems as though what she is saying perhaps falls more under voluntary transfers, or the placement of those who were involuntary transferred and should have been notified earlier (I read the third Friday of March).



Which part is the superintendent referencing? https://www.montgomeryschoolsmd.org/uploadedFiles/departments/associationrelations/MCEA_Contract.pdf

I agree. I would like to see where this is in the contract. Historically, even before Covid, teachers were informed in March that they were to be involuntarily transferred. Anyone who did not get a job offer during the first round of transfers would be placed in a position. This was completed before the end of the school year. The next ¨round¨ of transfers were people voluntarily interviewing for different positions. The last week of July, that would stop as principals needed to make final plans for start of school.

I also want to know why such a big shift could not be anticipated. Are we moving to an ¨oh well, it is not ideal but it is the best we can do, shoulder shrug¨ culture? If we do not believe we can do better, then we will not try to do better. There are so many areas in which MCPS could do better for everyone. This is just one of those many situations.

+1
The superintendent says, “This isn’t new” and that it’s doesn’t break the contract, so that’s it? Cite the specific section from the bargaining agreement.

The Superintendent knows it's not allowed by the contract. She just doesnt care. She already had a vote of no confidence from staff.

It may not be in the contract, but it has happened to many teachers in previous years. Apparently kindergarten enrollment is down in lots of schools in the county, which likely means there will be more transfers.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3frw4jfhDP4

Board meeting from yesterday.
They start talking about the transfers at 1:01:00

She mentions the transfer process happening though July, but that ignores that teachers are required to be notified at the end of February.

She did. She stated around 1:06 that there are two seasons for transfers, one in March and July and we are still in the month of July.

DP
I’d like her to point out where that is in the contract. I’m not an MCEA teacher, but I’ve looked at the contract linked in this thread. It seems as though what she is saying perhaps falls more under voluntary transfers, or the placement of those who were involuntary transferred and should have been notified earlier (I read the third Friday of March).



Which part is the superintendent referencing? https://www.montgomeryschoolsmd.org/uploadedFiles/departments/associationrelations/MCEA_Contract.pdf

I agree. I would like to see where this is in the contract. Historically, even before Covid, teachers were informed in March that they were to be involuntarily transferred. Anyone who did not get a job offer during the first round of transfers would be placed in a position. This was completed before the end of the school year. The next ¨round¨ of transfers were people voluntarily interviewing for different positions. The last week of July, that would stop as principals needed to make final plans for start of school.

I also want to know why such a big shift could not be anticipated. Are we moving to an ¨oh well, it is not ideal but it is the best we can do, shoulder shrug¨ culture? If we do not believe we can do better, then we will not try to do better. There are so many areas in which MCPS could do better for everyone. This is just one of those many situations.

+1
The superintendent says, “This isn’t new” and that it’s doesn’t break the contract, so that’s it? Cite the specific section from the bargaining agreement.

The Superintendent knows it's not allowed by the contract. She just doesnt care. She already had a vote of no confidence from staff.

You're wrong. It was TWO no confidence votes.

https://www.mymcmedia.org/mcea-members-almost-unanimously-support-no-confidence-vote-against-mcps-leadership/
http://www.theseventhstate.com/?p=14783
The MOU signed by McKnight:
https://www.montgomeryschoolsmd.org/uploadedFiles/departments/publicinfo/210212%20MOU%20MCPS%20MCEA%20COVID-19%20Recovery%20Plan%20SY%202020-2021%20.pdf

Now go sit in the corner before she calls out the National Guard on you!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3frw4jfhDP4

Board meeting from yesterday.
They start talking about the transfers at 1:01:00

She mentions the transfer process happening though July, but that ignores that teachers are required to be notified at the end of February.

She did. She stated around 1:06 that there are two seasons for transfers, one in March and July and we are still in the month of July.

DP
I’d like her to point out where that is in the contract. I’m not an MCEA teacher, but I’ve looked at the contract linked in this thread. It seems as though what she is saying perhaps falls more under voluntary transfers, or the placement of those who were involuntary transferred and should have been notified earlier (I read the third Friday of March).



Which part is the superintendent referencing? https://www.montgomeryschoolsmd.org/uploadedFiles/departments/associationrelations/MCEA_Contract.pdf

I agree. I would like to see where this is in the contract. Historically, even before Covid, teachers were informed in March that they were to be involuntarily transferred. Anyone who did not get a job offer during the first round of transfers would be placed in a position. This was completed before the end of the school year. The next ¨round¨ of transfers were people voluntarily interviewing for different positions. The last week of July, that would stop as principals needed to make final plans for start of school.

I also want to know why such a big shift could not be anticipated. Are we moving to an ¨oh well, it is not ideal but it is the best we can do, shoulder shrug¨ culture? If we do not believe we can do better, then we will not try to do better. There are so many areas in which MCPS could do better for everyone. This is just one of those many situations.

+1
The superintendent says, “This isn’t new” and that it’s doesn’t break the contract, so that’s it? Cite the specific section from the bargaining agreement.

The Superintendent knows it's not allowed by the contract. She just doesnt care. She already had a vote of no confidence from staff.

It may not be in the contract, but it has happened to many teachers in previous years. Apparently kindergarten enrollment is down in lots of schools in the county, which likely means there will be more transfers.

That's the point. Saying, "It has happened in the past" didn't mean it was allowed and it doesn't make it ok to do now. Maybe it wasn't questioned or challenged in the past. Now it is. The MCEA seems to be able to reference parts of the contract that supports their view.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3frw4jfhDP4

Board meeting from yesterday.
They start talking about the transfers at 1:01:00

She mentions the transfer process happening though July, but that ignores that teachers are required to be notified at the end of February.

She did. She stated around 1:06 that there are two seasons for transfers, one in March and July and we are still in the month of July.

DP
I’d like her to point out where that is in the contract. I’m not an MCEA teacher, but I’ve looked at the contract linked in this thread. It seems as though what she is saying perhaps falls more under voluntary transfers, or the placement of those who were involuntary transferred and should have been notified earlier (I read the third Friday of March).



Which part is the superintendent referencing? https://www.montgomeryschoolsmd.org/uploadedFiles/departments/associationrelations/MCEA_Contract.pdf

I agree. I would like to see where this is in the contract. Historically, even before Covid, teachers were informed in March that they were to be involuntarily transferred. Anyone who did not get a job offer during the first round of transfers would be placed in a position. This was completed before the end of the school year. The next ¨round¨ of transfers were people voluntarily interviewing for different positions. The last week of July, that would stop as principals needed to make final plans for start of school.

I also want to know why such a big shift could not be anticipated. Are we moving to an ¨oh well, it is not ideal but it is the best we can do, shoulder shrug¨ culture? If we do not believe we can do better, then we will not try to do better. There are so many areas in which MCPS could do better for everyone. This is just one of those many situations.

+1
The superintendent says, “This isn’t new” and that it’s doesn’t break the contract, so that’s it? Cite the specific section from the bargaining agreement.

The Superintendent knows it's not allowed by the contract. She just doesnt care. She already had a vote of no confidence from staff.

It may not be in the contract, but it has happened to many teachers in previous years. Apparently kindergarten enrollment is down in lots of schools in the county, which likely means there will be more transfers.

That's the point. Saying, "It has happened in the past" didn't mean it was allowed and it doesn't make it ok to do now. Maybe it wasn't questioned or challenged in the past. Now it is. The MCEA seems to be able to reference parts of the contract that supports their view.

Good point. Just because it happened to a few teachers in the past, most likely the youngest and maybe some without tenure and therefore afraid to speak out, does not mean it was correct in the past. It does not mean it is correct now. The question is, where is it in the contract? If it is in the contract, then it is fine. It is something that can be negotiated in the future. If it is not in the contract, then why did MCPS not see such a massive shift coming? If the real cause is they are not able to hire enough teachers so they are shifting programs so that they can justify shifting teachers,why is that the answer?

[Anonymous]

I have never seen someone get involuntarily transferred who wasn't the one with the least seniority or someone who was part time. That's what's so odd about the man at Sherwood on Twitter was has been there for ten years and says he's getting moved to balance for gender in his department. WTF?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I have never seen someone get involuntarily transferred who wasn't the one with the least seniority or someone who was part time. That's what's so odd about the man at Sherwood on Twitter was has been there for ten years and says he's getting moved to balance for gender in his department. WTF?

With PE teachers they need to have the right coverage for supervision of both locker rooms.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I have never seen someone get involuntarily transferred who wasn't the one with the least seniority or someone who was part time. That's what's so odd about the man at Sherwood on Twitter was has been there for ten years and says he's getting moved to balance for gender in his department. WTF?

I’ve never seen that either. There is some statement in the contract about it:

C. Factors
The principal or supervisor shall consider: a unit member’s length of MCPS service, area of certification and experience, and major or minor field of study as significant factors in the involuntary transfer process. Because the parties believe that there are educational benefits for all students to be taught by a diverse staff, the principal will consider diversity in the transfer process. Diversity is defined broadly to include, but is not limited to, gender, race, and ethnicity.
If other significant factors are equal, the principal shall use a unit member’s length of MCPS service as the prevailing factor, except for the systemwide effort to promote increased diversity in the workforce.

[Anonymous]

If anything, this is a good time to remind teachers to read their contract carefully. I never knew that, and I worked in the county for years. I actually left because I didn’t want to be involuntarily transferred, and I had the sort of position that’s vulnerable to being transferred. It happened to me twice, and that was it for me. I’ve happily been teaching (not in MCPS) in the same school for several years now without fear of being moved. What happened to the Sherwood guy is unusual but an example of why the policy hurts teacher retention.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I have never seen someone get involuntarily transferred who wasn't the one with the least seniority or someone who was part time. That's what's so odd about the man at Sherwood on Twitter was has been there for ten years and says he's getting moved to balance for gender in his department. WTF?

Then perhaps there is another side to this story?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I have never seen someone get involuntarily transferred who wasn't the one with the least seniority or someone who was part time. That's what's so odd about the man at Sherwood on Twitter was has been there for ten years and says he's getting moved to balance for gender in his department. WTF?

Then perhaps there is another side to this story?

You know there is more to this.