Springbrook HS Staff Letter

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Here’s how MCPS works:
1. Bad teachers become principals
2. Bad principals get moved to Central Office
3. Central Office supervises principals
4. The cycle continues until something ends up on the front page of the Washington Post

I encourage the Springbrook staff to reach out to Alexandra Robbins. Anyone else with toxic school leadership should also speak to the media.

On point, on point. And when you look at how MCPS seems to look at this concept, they throw it all in the garbage can. There are some people who would work as good principals when you look at something like their LinkedIn, but who cares about that!

The only way to fix this is to incentivize great teachers by paying them more than APs and principals, it could work because for most of these people being out of the classroom is incentive enough to take less pay; most were horrible teachers and couldn’t hack it in the classroom. Alternatively, make it so only the finest teachers have a shot at leadership. There shouldn’t be a single AP or principal who isn’t at a minimum a nationally board certified teacher first. You’d get rid of the trash we have now and fill leadership with the cream of the crop.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Here’s how MCPS works:
1. Bad teachers become principals
2. Bad principals get moved to Central Office
3. Central Office supervises principals
4. The cycle continues until something ends up on the front page of the Washington Post

I encourage the Springbrook staff to reach out to Alexandra Robbins. Anyone else with toxic school leadership should also speak to the media.

On point, on point. And when you look at how MCPS seems to look at this concept, they throw it all in the garbage can. There are some people who would work as good principals when you look at something like their LinkedIn, but who cares about that!

The only way to fix this is to incentivize great teachers by paying them more than APs and principals, it could work because for most of these people being out of the classroom is incentive enough to take less pay; most were horrible teachers and couldn’t hack it in the classroom. Alternatively, make it so only the finest teachers have a shot at leadership. There shouldn’t be a single AP or principal who isn’t at a minimum a nationally board certified teacher first. You’d get rid of the trash we have now and fill leadership with the cream of the crop.

I think there's some merit to what you're saying but I do think that being a principal and being a great teacher require very different skillsets and I'm not so sure that being a great teacher means you'll be a great principal. A principal is essentially a CEO of their school. Which means they need an incredible amount of executive function, diplomacy, political, budgeting, conflict resolution and creative problem solving skills at scale. Great teachers might be able to exhibit some of those skills in a classroom environment but that won't translate to managing the entire school population.

I do agree paying GREAT teachers on par with APs would be a way to incentivize people to grow where their strengths are and frankly where the school system's need is though. The bar for that kind of teacher would have to be incredibly high though.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Here’s how MCPS works:
1. Bad teachers become principals
2. Bad principals get moved to Central Office
3. Central Office supervises principals
4. The cycle continues until something ends up on the front page of the Washington Post

I encourage the Springbrook staff to reach out to Alexandra Robbins. Anyone else with toxic school leadership should also speak to the media.

On point, on point. And when you look at how MCPS seems to look at this concept, they throw it all in the garbage can. There are some people who would work as good principals when you look at something like their LinkedIn, but who cares about that!

The only way to fix this is to incentivize great teachers by paying them more than APs and principals, it could work because for most of these people being out of the classroom is incentive enough to take less pay; most were horrible teachers and couldn’t hack it in the classroom. Alternatively, make it so only the finest teachers have a shot at leadership. There shouldn’t be a single AP or principal who isn’t at a minimum a nationally board certified teacher first. You’d get rid of the trash we have now and fill leadership with the cream of the crop.

I think there's some merit to what you're saying but I do think that being a principal and being a great teacher require very different skillsets and I'm not so sure that being a great teacher means you'll be a great principal. A principal is essentially a CEO of their school. Which means they need an incredible amount of executive function, diplomacy, political, budgeting, conflict resolution and creative problem solving skills at scale. Great teachers might be able to exhibit some of those skills in a classroom environment but that won't translate to managing the entire school population.

I do agree paying GREAT teachers on par with APs would be a way to incentivize people to grow where their strengths are and frankly where the school system's need is though. The bar for that kind of teacher would have to be incredibly high though.

Many veteran teachers make high salaries, close to an AP’s and working 10 months.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Here’s how MCPS works:
1. Bad teachers become principals
2. Bad principals get moved to Central Office
3. Central Office supervises principals
4. The cycle continues until something ends up on the front page of the Washington Post

I encourage the Springbrook staff to reach out to Alexandra Robbins. Anyone else with toxic school leadership should also speak to the media.

On point, on point. And when you look at how MCPS seems to look at this concept, they throw it all in the garbage can. There are some people who would work as good principals when you look at something like their LinkedIn, but who cares about that!

The only way to fix this is to incentivize great teachers by paying them more than APs and principals, it could work because for most of these people being out of the classroom is incentive enough to take less pay; most were horrible teachers and couldn’t hack it in the classroom. Alternatively, make it so only the finest teachers have a shot at leadership. There shouldn’t be a single AP or principal who isn’t at a minimum a nationally board certified teacher first. You’d get rid of the trash we have now and fill leadership with the cream of the crop.

My understanding is that Teachers in MoCo makes a lot more than schools in surrounding counties. Isn't it the case? Throwing money on a problem is never a solution. It should be merit/performance based

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Here’s how MCPS works:
1. Bad teachers become principals
2. Bad principals get moved to Central Office
3. Central Office supervises principals
4. The cycle continues until something ends up on the front page of the Washington Post

I encourage the Springbrook staff to reach out to Alexandra Robbins. Anyone else with toxic school leadership should also speak to the media.

On point, on point. And when you look at how MCPS seems to look at this concept, they throw it all in the garbage can. There are some people who would work as good principals when you look at something like their LinkedIn, but who cares about that!

The only way to fix this is to incentivize great teachers by paying them more than APs and principals, it could work because for most of these people being out of the classroom is incentive enough to take less pay; most were horrible teachers and couldn’t hack it in the classroom. Alternatively, make it so only the finest teachers have a shot at leadership. There shouldn’t be a single AP or principal who isn’t at a minimum a nationally board certified teacher first. You’d get rid of the trash we have now and fill leadership with the cream of the crop.

My understanding is that Teachers in MoCo makes a lot more than schools in surrounding counties. Isn't it the case? Throwing money on a problem is never a solution. It should be merit/performance based

https://www.montgomeryschoolsmd.org/siteassets/district/departments/ersc/employees/pay/schedules/fy25_mcea_12-month_salary_schedules_eff_7.1.24.pdf

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Here’s how MCPS works:
1. Bad teachers become principals
2. Bad principals get moved to Central Office
3. Central Office supervises principals
4. The cycle continues until something ends up on the front page of the Washington Post

I encourage the Springbrook staff to reach out to Alexandra Robbins. Anyone else with toxic school leadership should also speak to the media.

On point, on point. And when you look at how MCPS seems to look at this concept, they throw it all in the garbage can. There are some people who would work as good principals when you look at something like their LinkedIn, but who cares about that!

So this proves that LinkedIn's are useless now.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Here’s how MCPS works:
1. Bad teachers become principals
2. Bad principals get moved to Central Office
3. Central Office supervises principals
4. The cycle continues until something ends up on the front page of the Washington Post

I encourage the Springbrook staff to reach out to Alexandra Robbins. Anyone else with toxic school leadership should also speak to the media.

On point, on point. And when you look at how MCPS seems to look at this concept, they throw it all in the garbage can. There are some people who would work as good principals when you look at something like their LinkedIn, but who cares about that!

The only way to fix this is to incentivize great teachers by paying them more than APs and principals, it could work because for most of these people being out of the classroom is incentive enough to take less pay; most were horrible teachers and couldn’t hack it in the classroom. Alternatively, make it so only the finest teachers have a shot at leadership. There shouldn’t be a single AP or principal who isn’t at a minimum a nationally board certified teacher first. You’d get rid of the trash we have now and fill leadership with the cream of the crop.

My understanding is that Teachers in MoCo makes a lot more than schools in surrounding counties. Isn't it the case? Throwing money on a problem is never a solution. It should be merit/performance based

How you determine whether a teacher is effective to make pay performance based. There are too many variables involved when determining whether teachers are effective. Strong test scores are not a good indicator.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Here’s how MCPS works:
1. Bad teachers become principals
2. Bad principals get moved to Central Office
3. Central Office supervises principals
4. The cycle continues until something ends up on the front page of the Washington Post

I encourage the Springbrook staff to reach out to Alexandra Robbins. Anyone else with toxic school leadership should also speak to the media.

On point, on point. And when you look at how MCPS seems to look at this concept, they throw it all in the garbage can. There are some people who would work as good principals when you look at something like their LinkedIn, but who cares about that!

The only way to fix this is to incentivize great teachers by paying them more than APs and principals, it could work because for most of these people being out of the classroom is incentive enough to take less pay; most were horrible teachers and couldn’t hack it in the classroom. Alternatively, make it so only the finest teachers have a shot at leadership. There shouldn’t be a single AP or principal who isn’t at a minimum a nationally board certified teacher first. You’d get rid of the trash we have now and fill leadership with the cream of the crop.

My understanding is that Teachers in MoCo makes a lot more than schools in surrounding counties. Isn't it the case? Throwing money on a problem is never a solution. It should be merit/performance based

How you determine whether a teacher is effective to make pay performance based. There are too many variables involved when determining whether teachers are effective. Strong test scores are not a good indicator.

I met someone who was working with a local school system to develop analytics to basically rank teachers. He said that they thought they were able to identify the top and bottom 5-10%, but all the rest were indistinguishable. It’s a tough problem.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Here’s how MCPS works:
1. Bad teachers become principals
2. Bad principals get moved to Central Office
3. Central Office supervises principals
4. The cycle continues until something ends up on the front page of the Washington Post

I encourage the Springbrook staff to reach out to Alexandra Robbins. Anyone else with toxic school leadership should also speak to the media.

On point, on point. And when you look at how MCPS seems to look at this concept, they throw it all in the garbage can. There are some people who would work as good principals when you look at something like their LinkedIn, but who cares about that!

The only way to fix this is to incentivize great teachers by paying them more than APs and principals, it could work because for most of these people being out of the classroom is incentive enough to take less pay; most were horrible teachers and couldn’t hack it in the classroom. Alternatively, make it so only the finest teachers have a shot at leadership. There shouldn’t be a single AP or principal who isn’t at a minimum a nationally board certified teacher first. You’d get rid of the trash we have now and fill leadership with the cream of the crop.

My understanding is that Teachers in MoCo makes a lot more than schools in surrounding counties. Isn't it the case? Throwing money on a problem is never a solution. It should be merit/performance based

How you determine whether a teacher is effective to make pay performance based. There are too many variables involved when determining whether teachers are effective. Strong test scores are not a good indicator.

I met someone who was working with a local school system to develop analytics to basically rank teachers. He said that they thought they were able to identify the top and bottom 5-10%, but all the rest were indistinguishable. It’s a tough problem.

This thread is so far off the original post. Can we focus on these teachers who were asking for support?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Here’s how MCPS works:
1. Bad teachers become principals
2. Bad principals get moved to Central Office
3. Central Office supervises principals
4. The cycle continues until something ends up on the front page of the Washington Post

I encourage the Springbrook staff to reach out to Alexandra Robbins. Anyone else with toxic school leadership should also speak to the media.

On point, on point. And when you look at how MCPS seems to look at this concept, they throw it all in the garbage can. There are some people who would work as good principals when you look at something like their LinkedIn, but who cares about that!

The only way to fix this is to incentivize great teachers by paying them more than APs and principals, it could work because for most of these people being out of the classroom is incentive enough to take less pay; most were horrible teachers and couldn’t hack it in the classroom. Alternatively, make it so only the finest teachers have a shot at leadership. There shouldn’t be a single AP or principal who isn’t at a minimum a nationally board certified teacher first. You’d get rid of the trash we have now and fill leadership with the cream of the crop.

My understanding is that Teachers in MoCo makes a lot more than schools in surrounding counties. Isn't it the case? Throwing money on a problem is never a solution. It should be merit/performance based

How you determine whether a teacher is effective to make pay performance based. There are too many variables involved when determining whether teachers are effective. Strong test scores are not a good indicator.

I met someone who was working with a local school system to develop analytics to basically rank teachers. He said that they thought they were able to identify the top and bottom 5-10%, but all the rest were indistinguishable. It’s a tough problem.

Nice going troll. Good way to try and go off-topic.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Here’s how MCPS works:
1. Bad teachers become principals
2. Bad principals get moved to Central Office
3. Central Office supervises principals
4. The cycle continues until something ends up on the front page of the Washington Post

I encourage the Springbrook staff to reach out to Alexandra Robbins. Anyone else with toxic school leadership should also speak to the media.

On point, on point. And when you look at how MCPS seems to look at this concept, they throw it all in the garbage can. There are some people who would work as good principals when you look at something like their LinkedIn, but who cares about that!

The only way to fix this is to incentivize great teachers by paying them more than APs and principals, it could work because for most of these people being out of the classroom is incentive enough to take less pay; most were horrible teachers and couldn’t hack it in the classroom. Alternatively, make it so only the finest teachers have a shot at leadership. There shouldn’t be a single AP or principal who isn’t at a minimum a nationally board certified teacher first. You’d get rid of the trash we have now and fill leadership with the cream of the crop.

Easier:

Require admin to continue teaching for part of their days. Then admin positions won’t be the easy way out of the classroom it currently is, which incentivizes bad teachers to move into admin. Also, admin would have to practice what they preach. They would have to implement every useless initiative right along with the overworked teachers, which means that (over time) fewer pointless initiatives would be pushed.

Win. Win. Better administrations and more purposeful work for all.

[Anonymous]

In some schools that is not realistic. The admin at our school are involved in issues from students, parents, staff almost nonstop. I don’t think it would be realistic for them to teach (and do all that goes into teaching). I’m what building is this realistic?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:In some schools that is not realistic. The admin at our school are involved in issues from students, parents, staff almost nonstop. I don’t think it would be realistic for them to teach (and do all that goes into teaching). I’m what building is this realistic?

Count yourself lucky that you have an administration that works. Not all of us experience that.

[Anonymous]

Any updates on Springbrook HS staff? Are you all still fighting the good fight or has the Empire (Central Office) won?

[Anonymous]

There seems to be a pretty significant disparity with how the Wootton principal was dealt with and how the Springbrook principal was dealt with. I wonder what the difference is?