New Superintendent to be named on February 8th

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:8 school districts in the state of Maryland alone are looking for new Superintendents.

My guess is MCPS will name McKnight for the job, and they can continue their downward slide. New blood is so needed, to clean house and fix the mess brought by the last few.

Why not let one of the other 8 have her? She’s bounced from other school systems before she was named Deputy Superintendent.

That’s my view as well. I see excuses frequently that things are not her fault because MCPS is so big. Maybe it’s just too big for her? Perhaps her supporters are right that she can be a good super but maybe only in the right environment. Nothing to be ashamed of for her to take on a smaller district and maybe even one a little closer to home would work better for her family.

It's the unrealistic expectation that a super has godlike powers. MCPS is a big ship and hard to turn.

Agreed.

You know what would help? A super who focuses on Excellence for all students. And maybe Safety.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

I. know she's done an amazing job in light of the mess she was handed. She's got my vote!

Wait. Wasn't she the Deputy Sup before? it's a nice spin though - try to make it look like it wasn't her issue.

https://www.montgomeryschoolsmd.org/superintendent/bio.aspx

This WAS her own mess to clean up. Plus, all the really bad stuff happened on HER watch, so she can't blame anyone else.

Let’s be clear.

McKnight is not responsible for anything that happened while she was deputy.
McKnight is not responsible for anything that happened while she was interim.
McKnight will not be responsible for anything that will happen when she is the superintendent.

You woke up at 7:56am on a Sunday to reply? This was the first thing on your mind when you woke up?? Crazy idea: give her the contract. In Maryland, Supers can only serve 4 year terms -- they can't get extensions for 1 year, 2 years, etc. If she isn't showing progressing leadership qualities by the end of the term, and results aren't improving (though it takes more time and requires the same people building on their predecessor as the average superintendent serves 3 years), then don't renew. God, why does DCUM have to be so crazy, unreasonable, and uptight? Sometimes I feel like there are 5 year olds on these threads, not middle age folks.

Lol. Most parents don’t sleep in till 10am on a Sunday. Who says posting on this thread was the first thing that PP did? Even so, so what?

BTW - your four year argument to test Dr. McKnight out is the lamest thing I have ever read on DCUM. Four years is 1/3 of a child’s public school education. She was Deputy Superintendent and she was the Interim Superintendent. She has shown to be disconnected from the school system that she is leading. Violence is up. There was next to no planning for the surge of COVID following winter break. No confidence votes by two major unions in MCPS.

Nope. You don’t give her a four year contract. Dr. McKnight has already shown she does not have the skills for the job.

Firstly, I'm a parent as well. Moreover, knowing that there is a pronounced shortage of superintendent candidates nationwide, who else do you recommend, especially when it comes to dealing with very demanding DC area parents? Instead of throwing insults, please note that the four-year "argument" is established Maryland law, and I'd rather have consistency in a critical role. In terms of "violence" being up, correlation does not equal causation. Not every union member voted, it's only the most vocal ones that we end up hearing from.

What shortage? 12 people applied!

And other similar sized districts have had 5 dozen apply for their search. Just because someone applies doesn't mean that they automatically have the mustard to hold their own. For a district like MCPS, 12 is quite low.

Agreed. The Miami Dade job had 16 applicants for an accelerated search and the Broward County had 39, with 8 shortlisted and now 2 finalist. And in at least one of those searches the applicants are named. If MoCo only has 12, one of which is the current interim, it definitely says something.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

I. know she's done an amazing job in light of the mess she was handed. She's got my vote!

Wait. Wasn't she the Deputy Sup before? it's a nice spin though - try to make it look like it wasn't her issue.

https://www.montgomeryschoolsmd.org/superintendent/bio.aspx

This WAS her own mess to clean up. Plus, all the really bad stuff happened on HER watch, so she can't blame anyone else.

Let’s be clear.

McKnight is not responsible for anything that happened while she was deputy.
McKnight is not responsible for anything that happened while she was interim.
McKnight will not be responsible for anything that will happen when she is the superintendent.

You woke up at 7:56am on a Sunday to reply? This was the first thing on your mind when you woke up?? Crazy idea: give her the contract. In Maryland, Supers can only serve 4 year terms -- they can't get extensions for 1 year, 2 years, etc. If she isn't showing progressing leadership qualities by the end of the term, and results aren't improving (though it takes more time and requires the same people building on their predecessor as the average superintendent serves 3 years), then don't renew. God, why does DCUM have to be so crazy, unreasonable, and uptight? Sometimes I feel like there are 5 year olds on these threads, not middle age folks.

Lol. Most parents don’t sleep in till 10am on a Sunday. Who says posting on this thread was the first thing that PP did? Even so, so what?

BTW - your four year argument to test Dr. McKnight out is the lamest thing I have ever read on DCUM. Four years is 1/3 of a child’s public school education. She was Deputy Superintendent and she was the Interim Superintendent. She has shown to be disconnected from the school system that she is leading. Violence is up. There was next to no planning for the surge of COVID following winter break. No confidence votes by two major unions in MCPS.

Nope. You don’t give her a four year contract. Dr. McKnight has already shown she does not have the skills for the job.

Firstly, I'm a parent as well. Moreover, knowing that there is a pronounced shortage of superintendent candidates nationwide, who else do you recommend, especially when it comes to dealing with very demanding DC area parents? Instead of throwing insults, please note that the four-year "argument" is established Maryland law, and I'd rather have consistency in a critical role. In terms of "violence" being up, correlation does not equal causation. Not every union member voted, it's only the most vocal ones that we end up hearing from.

What shortage? 12 people applied!

And other similar sized districts have had 5 dozen apply for their search. Just because someone applies doesn't mean that they automatically have the mustard to hold their own. For a district like MCPS, 12 is quite low.

Agreed. The Miami Dade job had 16 applicants for an accelerated search and the Broward County had 39, with 8 shortlisted and now 2 finalist. And in at least one of those searches the applicants are named. If MoCo only has 12, one of which is the current interim, it definitely says something.

Finally, some common sense on this thread! Why would any superintendent want this job seeing half of the comments on this thread? Not every situation has some one-sided narrative that sticks and spreads. Although a reason why there may only be 12 applicants is that people were scared away by the interim title, as most of those candidates end up getting the job. Having a year-plus head start and knowing the system is very hard to beat.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

I. know she's done an amazing job in light of the mess she was handed. She's got my vote!

Wait. Wasn't she the Deputy Sup before? it's a nice spin though - try to make it look like it wasn't her issue.

https://www.montgomeryschoolsmd.org/superintendent/bio.aspx

This WAS her own mess to clean up. Plus, all the really bad stuff happened on HER watch, so she can't blame anyone else.

Let’s be clear.

McKnight is not responsible for anything that happened while she was deputy.
McKnight is not responsible for anything that happened while she was interim.
McKnight will not be responsible for anything that will happen when she is the superintendent.

You woke up at 7:56am on a Sunday to reply? This was the first thing on your mind when you woke up?? Crazy idea: give her the contract. In Maryland, Supers can only serve 4 year terms -- they can't get extensions for 1 year, 2 years, etc. If she isn't showing progressing leadership qualities by the end of the term, and results aren't improving (though it takes more time and requires the same people building on their predecessor as the average superintendent serves 3 years), then don't renew. God, why does DCUM have to be so crazy, unreasonable, and uptight? Sometimes I feel like there are 5 year olds on these threads, not middle age folks.

Lol. Most parents don’t sleep in till 10am on a Sunday. Who says posting on this thread was the first thing that PP did? Even so, so what?

BTW - your four year argument to test Dr. McKnight out is the lamest thing I have ever read on DCUM. Four years is 1/3 of a child’s public school education. She was Deputy Superintendent and she was the Interim Superintendent. She has shown to be disconnected from the school system that she is leading. Violence is up. There was next to no planning for the surge of COVID following winter break. No confidence votes by two major unions in MCPS.

Nope. You don’t give her a four year contract. Dr. McKnight has already shown she does not have the skills for the job.

Firstly, I'm a parent as well. Moreover, knowing that there is a pronounced shortage of superintendent candidates nationwide, who else do you recommend, especially when it comes to dealing with very demanding DC area parents? Instead of throwing insults, please note that the four-year "argument" is established Maryland law, and I'd rather have consistency in a critical role. In terms of "violence" being up, correlation does not equal causation. Not every union member voted, it's only the most vocal ones that we end up hearing from.

What shortage? 12 people applied!

And other similar sized districts have had 5 dozen apply for their search. Just because someone applies doesn't mean that they automatically have the mustard to hold their own. For a district like MCPS, 12 is quite low.

Agreed. The Miami Dade job had 16 applicants for an accelerated search and the Broward County had 39, with 8 shortlisted and now 2 finalist. And in at least one of those searches the applicants are named. If MoCo only has 12, one of which is the current interim, it definitely says something.

12 is plenty and contradicts the Jack-Smith-had-to-be-begged-to-take-on-another-job-where-he-could-collect-a-second-retirement-and-second-medical-benefits-job-to-then-retire-again-to-be-with-his-grandchild-again.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

I. know she's done an amazing job in light of the mess she was handed. She's got my vote!

Wait. Wasn't she the Deputy Sup before? it's a nice spin though - try to make it look like it wasn't her issue.

https://www.montgomeryschoolsmd.org/superintendent/bio.aspx

This WAS her own mess to clean up. Plus, all the really bad stuff happened on HER watch, so she can't blame anyone else.

Let’s be clear.

McKnight is not responsible for anything that happened while she was deputy.
McKnight is not responsible for anything that happened while she was interim.
McKnight will not be responsible for anything that will happen when she is the superintendent.

You woke up at 7:56am on a Sunday to reply? This was the first thing on your mind when you woke up?? Crazy idea: give her the contract. In Maryland, Supers can only serve 4 year terms -- they can't get extensions for 1 year, 2 years, etc. If she isn't showing progressing leadership qualities by the end of the term, and results aren't improving (though it takes more time and requires the same people building on their predecessor as the average superintendent serves 3 years), then don't renew. God, why does DCUM have to be so crazy, unreasonable, and uptight? Sometimes I feel like there are 5 year olds on these threads, not middle age folks.

I’m the PP you are trying to make fun of. I get up at 5:30 AM on weekdays and 6:30 AM on weekends for me is sleeping in. This is normal for many adults with kids.

To the substance of your proposal, why should she get a 4 year trial period when she’s just had a trial period and has been found wanting? What sense does that make? In addition and this is important, when this county does not extend the contacts of supers it makes it harder to attract good candidates. When Starrs contract was not extended, it was extraordinarily hard to get recruit good candidates and I understand that Smith had to basically be begged to take it. So whoever is appointed should be considered permanent and you yourself admit that wouldn’t be a good idea based on her record so far.

A lot to decipher here. Wasn't trying to make fun of you, it's just an awkward time to hop on DCUM is all.

I never said that the 4 years was a "trial period" by any means. The point I wanted to assert is that Superintendent contracts can be cancelled or non-renewed at any time. It will take multiple years for someone to fully grasp the dynamics of such a huge, diverse school district, not to mention the politics that come with it. Let's be real: as much as it should be about kids, it's equally about the relationships with internal and external partners as well and the appearance of looking in control, not the substance/follow through (which she has shown).

Smith didn't have to be "begged". The original candidate, Andrew Houlihan, declined the offer when he was Houston's Chief Academic Officer because the Board was fractured at that time. He had thrown his name in there just for the sake of it and didn't actually expect to get it, just to angle for bigger districts in the future because, hey, he was a "finalist" for MCPS. Hence why he withdrew his candidacy the next day. How does all of that lead to me saying it's not a good idea to hire her based on record? I think it's better than people give her credit for. Sure, some things could've been handled differently on her part, but you can't please everyone and she's a quick study. Show me someone who is mastering the unpredictable COVID environment right now.

This is important, so let’s be clear about this.

1. The non-renewal of Starr’s contract had a real negative impact on the system’s reputation which made it more difficult to recruit a highly qualified replacement. This is undisputed and the cancellation or non-renewal of McKnight so shortly after Starr would be have a similar impact, but likely compounded. In fact, it’s very reasonable to foresee a scenario 4 years from now with McKnight continuing to perform poorly (why should we expect otherwise?) and this being the chief argument to retain her. Whether or not it’s possible to remove her is irrelevant to the reality of whether or not it’s practical or responsible to do so where MCPS has boxed itself into a corner with regards to attracting qualified replacements.

2. If it takes years, as you assert, to build the requisite knowledge, skills and relationships to competently lead this school district. Then why has McKnight not been ready to lead from the moment she was made interim? She’s been deputy for years. She’s been interim for a year. According to you, there would be no better preparation, and yet her performance has raised significant questions about her leadership qualities. It’s too simple to blame COVID for what are clear deficiencies in her judgment and communication which are the two most important qualities for leaders. If leaders routinely make bad decisions and are poor communicators, then they rightly are poor leaders. Perhaps with time her judgment will improve, but at this stage in her career there is no reasonable expectation to believe that giving her more time would improve her communication skills.

Selecting her is and will be a massive mistake will have significant and long-term negative consequences for MCPS.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

I. know she's done an amazing job in light of the mess she was handed. She's got my vote!

Wait. Wasn't she the Deputy Sup before? it's a nice spin though - try to make it look like it wasn't her issue.

https://www.montgomeryschoolsmd.org/superintendent/bio.aspx

This WAS her own mess to clean up. Plus, all the really bad stuff happened on HER watch, so she can't blame anyone else.

Let’s be clear.

McKnight is not responsible for anything that happened while she was deputy.
McKnight is not responsible for anything that happened while she was interim.
McKnight will not be responsible for anything that will happen when she is the superintendent.

You woke up at 7:56am on a Sunday to reply? This was the first thing on your mind when you woke up?? Crazy idea: give her the contract. In Maryland, Supers can only serve 4 year terms -- they can't get extensions for 1 year, 2 years, etc. If she isn't showing progressing leadership qualities by the end of the term, and results aren't improving (though it takes more time and requires the same people building on their predecessor as the average superintendent serves 3 years), then don't renew. God, why does DCUM have to be so crazy, unreasonable, and uptight? Sometimes I feel like there are 5 year olds on these threads, not middle age folks.

Lol. Most parents don’t sleep in till 10am on a Sunday. Who says posting on this thread was the first thing that PP did? Even so, so what?

BTW - your four year argument to test Dr. McKnight out is the lamest thing I have ever read on DCUM. Four years is 1/3 of a child’s public school education. She was Deputy Superintendent and she was the Interim Superintendent. She has shown to be disconnected from the school system that she is leading. Violence is up. There was next to no planning for the surge of COVID following winter break. No confidence votes by two major unions in MCPS.

Nope. You don’t give her a four year contract. Dr. McKnight has already shown she does not have the skills for the job.

Firstly, I'm a parent as well. Moreover, knowing that there is a pronounced shortage of superintendent candidates nationwide, who else do you recommend, especially when it comes to dealing with very demanding DC area parents? Instead of throwing insults, please note that the four-year "argument" is established Maryland law, and I'd rather have consistency in a critical role. In terms of "violence" being up, correlation does not equal causation. Not every union member voted, it's only the most vocal ones that we end up hearing from.

What shortage? 12 people applied!

And other similar sized districts have had 5 dozen apply for their search. Just because someone applies doesn't mean that they automatically have the mustard to hold their own. For a district like MCPS, 12 is quite low.

Agreed. The Miami Dade job had 16 applicants for an accelerated search and the Broward County had 39, with 8 shortlisted and now 2 finalist. And in at least one of those searches the applicants are named. If MoCo only has 12, one of which is the current interim, it definitely says something.

Finally, some common sense on this thread! Why would any superintendent want this job seeing half of the comments on this thread? Not every situation has some one-sided narrative that sticks and spreads. Although a reason why there may only be 12 applicants is that people were scared away by the interim title, as most of those candidates end up getting the job. Having a year-plus head start and knowing the system is very hard to beat.

Exactly. Who is going to apply for a job where the selection process is already and obviously tilted for one candidate? MC BOE also has a history of capricious governance which would also scare away qualified applicants. If the BOE really wanted to test the waters and to have an open competition, they would have appointed someone else interim to ensure that the selection process can be viewed as open and fair. For this very reason in my organization, anyone who is acting is never considered as a replacement for that position when advertised. MCPS is terminally afflicted by poor governance.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

I. know she's done an amazing job in light of the mess she was handed. She's got my vote!

Wait. Wasn't she the Deputy Sup before? it's a nice spin though - try to make it look like it wasn't her issue.

https://www.montgomeryschoolsmd.org/superintendent/bio.aspx

This WAS her own mess to clean up. Plus, all the really bad stuff happened on HER watch, so she can't blame anyone else.

Let’s be clear.

McKnight is not responsible for anything that happened while she was deputy.
McKnight is not responsible for anything that happened while she was interim.
McKnight will not be responsible for anything that will happen when she is the superintendent.

You woke up at 7:56am on a Sunday to reply? This was the first thing on your mind when you woke up?? Crazy idea: give her the contract. In Maryland, Supers can only serve 4 year terms -- they can't get extensions for 1 year, 2 years, etc. If she isn't showing progressing leadership qualities by the end of the term, and results aren't improving (though it takes more time and requires the same people building on their predecessor as the average superintendent serves 3 years), then don't renew. God, why does DCUM have to be so crazy, unreasonable, and uptight? Sometimes I feel like there are 5 year olds on these threads, not middle age folks.

I’m the PP you are trying to make fun of. I get up at 5:30 AM on weekdays and 6:30 AM on weekends for me is sleeping in. This is normal for many adults with kids.

To the substance of your proposal, why should she get a 4 year trial period when she’s just had a trial period and has been found wanting? What sense does that make? In addition and this is important, when this county does not extend the contacts of supers it makes it harder to attract good candidates. When Starrs contract was not extended, it was extraordinarily hard to get recruit good candidates and I understand that Smith had to basically be begged to take it. So whoever is appointed should be considered permanent and you yourself admit that wouldn’t be a good idea based on her record so far.

A lot to decipher here. Wasn't trying to make fun of you, it's just an awkward time to hop on DCUM is all.

I never said that the 4 years was a "trial period" by any means. The point I wanted to assert is that Superintendent contracts can be cancelled or non-renewed at any time. It will take multiple years for someone to fully grasp the dynamics of such a huge, diverse school district, not to mention the politics that come with it. Let's be real: as much as it should be about kids, it's equally about the relationships with internal and external partners as well and the appearance of looking in control, not the substance/follow through (which she has shown).

Smith didn't have to be "begged". The original candidate, Andrew Houlihan, declined the offer when he was Houston's Chief Academic Officer because the Board was fractured at that time. He had thrown his name in there just for the sake of it and didn't actually expect to get it, just to angle for bigger districts in the future because, hey, he was a "finalist" for MCPS. Hence why he withdrew his candidacy the next day. How does all of that lead to me saying it's not a good idea to hire her based on record? I think it's better than people give her credit for. Sure, some things could've been handled differently on her part, but you can't please everyone and she's a quick study. Show me someone who is mastering the unpredictable COVID environment right now.

This is important, so let’s be clear about this.

1. The non-renewal of Starr’s contract had a real negative impact on the system’s reputation which made it more difficult to recruit a highly qualified replacement. This is undisputed and the cancellation or non-renewal of McKnight so shortly after Starr would be have a similar impact, but likely compounded. In fact, it’s very reasonable to foresee a scenario 4 years from now with McKnight continuing to perform poorly (why should we expect otherwise?) and this being the chief argument to retain her. Whether or not it’s possible to remove her is irrelevant to the reality of whether or not it’s practical or responsible to do so where MCPS has boxed itself into a corner with regards to attracting qualified replacements.

2. If it takes years, as you assert, to build the requisite knowledge, skills and relationships to competently lead this school district. Then why has McKnight not been ready to lead from the moment she was made interim? She’s been deputy for years. She’s been interim for a year. According to you, there would be no better preparation, and yet her performance has raised significant questions about her leadership qualities. It’s too simple to blame COVID for what are clear deficiencies in her judgment and communication which are the two most important qualities for leaders. If leaders routinely make bad decisions and are poor communicators, then they rightly are poor leaders. Perhaps with time her judgment will improve, but at this stage in her career there is no reasonable expectation to believe that giving her more time would improve her communication skills.

Selecting her is and will be a massive mistake will have significant and long-term negative consequences for MCPS.

Agree with much of this, but just providing some clarifications on the timeline:

August 2019: McKnight's position as deputy superintendent begins

March 2020: Covid-19 pandemic begins

January 2021: Smith announces his retirement

June 2021: McKnight's position as acting superintendent begins

July 2021: McKnight's position as interim superintendent begins

[Anonymous]

Finally, some common sense on this thread! Why would any superintendent want this job seeing half of the comments on this thread? Not every situation has some one-sided narrative that sticks and spreads. Although a reason why there may only be 12 applicants is that people were scared away by the interim title, as most of those candidates end up getting the job. Having a year-plus head start and knowing the system is very hard to beat.

Are you saying we're stuck with McKnight because all the good applicants refused the job?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Finally, some common sense on this thread! Why would any superintendent want this job seeing half of the comments on this thread? Not every situation has some one-sided narrative that sticks and spreads. Although a reason why there may only be 12 applicants is that people were scared away by the interim title, as most of those candidates end up getting the job. Having a year-plus head start and knowing the system is very hard to beat.

Are you saying we're stuck with McKnight because all the good applicants refused the job?

I'm saying that applicants probably didn't reply because the DC area has a reputation of over-involved stakeholders (especially parents - for example, we know how wacky W school parents can get). People also probably refrained from applying because it's hard to beat out an incumbent/interim.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Finally, some common sense on this thread! Why would any superintendent want this job seeing half of the comments on this thread? Not every situation has some one-sided narrative that sticks and spreads. Although a reason why there may only be 12 applicants is that people were scared away by the interim title, as most of those candidates end up getting the job. Having a year-plus head start and knowing the system is very hard to beat.

Are you saying we're stuck with McKnight because all the good applicants refused the job?

I'm saying that applicants probably didn't reply because the DC area has a reputation of over-involved stakeholders (especially parents - for example, we know how wacky W school parents can get). People also probably refrained from applying because it's hard to beat out an incumbent/interim.

But the net result is that we're stuck with a bad candidate. That's terrible!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It seems odd that they are allotting 90 minutes on the agenda for 'Conditional Appointment of the Superintendent of Schools' and then going into closed session for 2 hours, before opening the meeting again at 12:30. What is going to be happening in the open meeting between 9 and 10:30, once they announce the name of the new superintendent?

Here is the answer:

Following the vote, Board members and the appointed superintendent will hold a media briefing.

The Board meeting begins at 9:00 a.m. The media briefing is expected to begin at 9:30 a.m.

https://ww2.montgomeryschoolsmd.org/press/index.aspx?pagetype=showrelease&id=13103&type=&startYear=&pageNumber=&mode=

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Finally, some common sense on this thread! Why would any superintendent want this job seeing half of the comments on this thread? Not every situation has some one-sided narrative that sticks and spreads. Although a reason why there may only be 12 applicants is that people were scared away by the interim title, as most of those candidates end up getting the job. Having a year-plus head start and knowing the system is very hard to beat.

Are you saying we're stuck with McKnight because all the good applicants refused the job?

I'm saying that applicants probably didn't reply because the DC area has a reputation of over-involved stakeholders (especially parents - for example, we know how wacky W school parents can get). People also probably refrained from applying because it's hard to beat out an incumbent/interim.

Is it more reasonable to blame parents broadly for a bad pool of candidates or blame the fact the current person sitting in the office has applied for the job and is a Black woman?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It seems odd that they are allotting 90 minutes on the agenda for 'Conditional Appointment of the Superintendent of Schools' and then going into closed session for 2 hours, before opening the meeting again at 12:30. What is going to be happening in the open meeting between 9 and 10:30, once they announce the name of the new superintendent?

Here is the answer:

Following the vote, Board members and the appointed superintendent will hold a media briefing.

The Board meeting begins at 9:00 a.m. The media briefing is expected to begin at 9:30 a.m.

https://ww2.montgomeryschoolsmd.org/press/index.aspx?pagetype=showrelease&id=13103&type=&startYear=&pageNumber=&mode=

All about the PR for Brenda Wolff and McKnight.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Finally, some common sense on this thread! Why would any superintendent want this job seeing half of the comments on this thread? Not every situation has some one-sided narrative that sticks and spreads. Although a reason why there may only be 12 applicants is that people were scared away by the interim title, as most of those candidates end up getting the job. Having a year-plus head start and knowing the system is very hard to beat.

Are you saying we're stuck with McKnight because all the good applicants refused the job?

I'm saying that applicants probably didn't reply because the DC area has a reputation of over-involved stakeholders (especially parents - for example, we know how wacky W school parents can get). People also probably refrained from applying because it's hard to beat out an incumbent/interim.

I’d add i,n the fact Maryland has 8 counties of smaller size looking for a Super doesn’t help, two of which are neighboring. Neither does the fact that Fairfax is looking for a Super and its similarly sized and-demographics and also neighboring. Not to mention all that went down in DCPS last year. As PP said, the region is developing a reputation for being notoriously difficult, stressful, political, and a burnout. Add in a Pandemic and also an area with a high number of competitive private schools, its not as attractive a position as some of ya’ll might think.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Finally, some common sense on this thread! Why would any superintendent want this job seeing half of the comments on this thread? Not every situation has some one-sided narrative that sticks and spreads. Although a reason why there may only be 12 applicants is that people were scared away by the interim title, as most of those candidates end up getting the job. Having a year-plus head start and knowing the system is very hard to beat.

Are you saying we're stuck with McKnight because all the good applicants refused the job?

I'm saying that applicants probably didn't reply because the DC area has a reputation of over-involved stakeholders (especially parents - for example, we know how wacky W school parents can get). People also probably refrained from applying because it's hard to beat out an incumbent/interim.

I’d add i,n the fact Maryland has 8 counties of smaller size looking for a Super doesn’t help, two of which are neighboring. Neither does the fact that Fairfax is looking for a Super and its similarly sized and-demographics and also neighboring. Not to mention all that went down in DCPS last year. As PP said, the region is developing a reputation for being notoriously difficult, stressful, political, and a burnout. Add in a Pandemic and also an area with a high number of competitive private schools, its not as attractive a position as some of ya’ll might think.

What a very MCPS-centric view of the world that everything is not their fault.