New Superintendent to be named on February 8th

[Anonymous]

I don't have so much of a problem with McKnight as I do with the process. Absolutely zero communication. No idea on who the other candidates were. Were there even other candidates?

I am against this decision due to lack of transparency.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:They just want to make history and nobody really cares about the students!

Students are history!

[Anonymous]

Great news! Dr. McKnight has been named permanent superintendent of MCPS!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I don't have so much of a problem with McKnight as I do with the process. Absolutely zero communication. No idea on who the other candidates were. Were there even other candidates?

I am against this decision due to lack of transparency.

I have to disagree. The community appoints the board so we have plenty of involvement. That's how representative democracy works.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't have so much of a problem with McKnight as I do with the process. Absolutely zero communication. No idea on who the other candidates were. Were there even other candidates?

I am against this decision due to lack of transparency.

I have to disagree. The community appoints the board so we have plenty of involvement. That's how representative democracy works.

More like mob rule. You don't represent my family, that's for sure.

[Anonymous]

McKnight is the new superintendent. Just announced.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't have so much of a problem with McKnight as I do with the process. Absolutely zero communication. No idea on who the other candidates were. Were there even other candidates?

I am against this decision due to lack of transparency.

I have to disagree. The community appoints the board so we have plenty of involvement. That's how representative democracy works.

More like mob rule. You don't represent my family, that's for sure.

NP. Sometimes the people elected to represent you aren't the people you'd pick. That's part of how democracy works. It's not "mob rule."

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I don't have so much of a problem with McKnight as I do with the process. Absolutely zero communication. No idea on who the other candidates were. Were there even other candidates?

I am against this decision due to lack of transparency.

There have been so many local news articles about the process, including at least one that was posted on this thread. Of course they wouldn't announce who the other candidates were. If you applied for a new job, would you want everyone at you current job to know? The other candidates were just that - job candidates who currently have a job and don't want everyone where they work to know that they're in the running for a new job.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't have so much of a problem with McKnight as I do with the process. Absolutely zero communication. No idea on who the other candidates were. Were there even other candidates?

I am against this decision due to lack of transparency.

I have to disagree. The community appoints the board so we have plenty of involvement. That's how representative democracy works.

"Appoints" the board? Do you mean "elects" the board?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't have so much of a problem with McKnight as I do with the process. Absolutely zero communication. No idea on who the other candidates were. Were there even other candidates?

I am against this decision due to lack of transparency.

I have to disagree. The community appoints the board so we have plenty of involvement. That's how representative democracy works.

I guess then you did not have a problem with the 2016 Presidential election or the SCOTUS confirmation of ACB. That is also how representative democracy works.

[Anonymous]

I’m ok with McKnight. We made it through. Schools stayed open during these months. I’m happy. I was doubtful at the time but let’s work to make this successful. We need her to be successful so that our school system can function. Please stop the hate at this point.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I don't have so much of a problem with McKnight as I do with the process. Absolutely zero communication. No idea on who the other candidates were. Were there even other candidates?

I am against this decision due to lack of transparency.

This is Brenda Wolff in action. You can vote her out in June.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They just want to make history and nobody really cares about the students!

Students are history!

The fact that their own announcement email first highlighted the "history" they were making and then added her qualifications in a subsequent paragraph, almost as an afterthought, shows what their priorities were. Competence sacrificed at the altar of "History"

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

And this type of feedback/snark is exactly what I’m talking about. We didn’t mention anything about fault. We mentioned why the job is not as attractive in the open market as some seem to believe it is. But like always if it doesn’t align with your sentiments then it can’t possibly be reality…

I’m not sure how you can read a phrase like “the region is developing a reputation for being notoriously difficult,” and then object to someone pointing out that this looks like finger pointing.

Yes, the hyper-privileged parents from MCPS who think the school system should cater to them are very difficult to deal with since no matter what the super does it will never be sufficient.

You mean the people who demand MCPS to uphold their legal obligation to provide free and appropriate education?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Yes, the hyper-privileged parents from MCPS who think the school system should cater to them are very difficult to deal with since no matter what the super does it will never be sufficient.

Disingenuous nonsense



Huh? The local school system shouldn't cater to its parents? Is this sarcasm?