New Principals/Vacancies for SY 2022-2023

[Anonymous]

Principals at Wells and MacFarland are both leaving. I talked to Principal Vroman (Wells) yesterday and she’s taking a break. I’m sad to lose her but hopeful we can hire a good replacement.

[Anonymous]

I've got to give it to the new LT Principal. She pulled this off. She seems like the real deal. Just what they needed. Of course her predecessors did some housecleaning before she arrived. Keep the momentum going!

[Anonymous]

The big issue with DCPS is that it’s only a 1 year contract. It does not encourage a long term view or commitment from applicants. Move up to get a principal position and then leave in 1-2 years for something better.

It also doesn’t help that DCPS’s model to top down with principals having much less autonomy as central office tries to control everything. Then when you don’t toe the line with them, they will let you go or won’t renew your contract. I think that is what happen with School without Walls HS principal.

It’s a dysfunctional set up.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The big issue with DCPS is that it’s only a 1 year contract. It does not encourage a long term view or commitment from applicants. Move up to get a principal position and then leave in 1-2 years for something better.

It also doesn’t help that DCPS’s model to top down with principals having much less autonomy as central office tries to control everything. Then when you don’t toe the line with them, they will let you go or won’t renew your contract. I think that is what happen with School without Walls HS principal.

It’s a dysfunctional set up.

His contract was renewed - he was FIRED in October when he stood up to central office

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The big issue with DCPS is that it’s only a 1 year contract. It does not encourage a long term view or commitment from applicants. Move up to get a principal position and then leave in 1-2 years for something better.

It also doesn’t help that DCPS’s model to top down with principals having much less autonomy as central office tries to control everything. Then when you don’t toe the line with them, they will let you go or won’t renew your contract. I think that is what happen with School without Walls HS principal.

It’s a dysfunctional set up.

His contract was renewed - he was FIRED in October when he stood up to central office

I thought he was insisting on an in-person test while refusing to reopen for in-person school.

[Anonymous]

Wilson/ Jackson-Reed HS

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The big issue with DCPS is that it’s only a 1 year contract. It does not encourage a long term view or commitment from applicants. Move up to get a principal position and then leave in 1-2 years for something better.

It also doesn’t help that DCPS’s model to top down with principals having much less autonomy as central office tries to control everything. Then when you don’t toe the line with them, they will let you go or won’t renew your contract. I think that is what happen with School without Walls HS principal.

It’s a dysfunctional set up.

His contract was renewed - he was FIRED in October when he stood up to central office

I thought he was insisting on an in-person test while refusing to reopen for in-person school.

Rumor is he was pushing to keep schools closed when they were trying to reopen but they claimed he didn’t follow proper lottery protocols to let kids into FS. Which honestly he hasn’t followed in years at either school. They just wanted him gone and to have someone who would toe the line and be controlled by central office.

[Anonymous]

Is it true that Willson/Jackson-Reed does not have a permanent principal?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The big issue with DCPS is that it’s only a 1 year contract. It does not encourage a long term view or commitment from applicants. Move up to get a principal position and then leave in 1-2 years for something better.

It also doesn’t help that DCPS’s model to top down with principals having much less autonomy as central office tries to control everything. Then when you don’t toe the line with them, they will let you go or won’t renew your contract. I think that is what happen with School without Walls HS principal.

It’s a dysfunctional set up.

His contract was renewed - he was FIRED in October when he stood up to central office

I thought he was insisting on an in-person test while refusing to reopen for in-person school.

Rumor is he was pushing to keep schools closed when they were trying to reopen but they claimed he didn’t follow proper lottery protocols to let kids into FS. Which honestly he hasn’t followed in years at either school. They just wanted him gone and to have someone who would toe the line and be controlled by central office.

I don't know the man but let's take a moment and dissect what you just posted, shall we?

Rumor is
So we start by repeating unfounded information as a basis for our post. Way to enhance your credibility from the start.

they claimed he didn’t follow proper lottery protocols to let kids into FS
Did he not follow proper protocols? Must these two things be mutually exclusive? Couldn't he have both wanted to keep schools closed and not followed protocols? If he did in fact do both then wouldn't they be well within their rights to fire him for violating protocols? Do you think that the lottery and admissions protocols should be followed only when admins like them? And otherwise they can be disregarded? Have you thought about how that works when an admin applies an unapproved standard you don't like?

Which honestly he hasn’t followed in years at either school
So now you tell us the pretend reason he was fired was activity in which he was engaged? Same questions as above as to why he should be allowed to ignore the protocols and rules.

have someone who would toe the line and be controlled by central office.
This confuses me. Isn't that what every management team in any job really wants; people who will follow the policies and procedures set forth by the organization? Policies you acknowledge he regularly violated? This isn't a situation where he was censured or fired for speaking truth to power; he can say whatever he wants. In truth he can do what he wants. But thee are consequences for violating your employer's policies.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Is it true that Willson/Jackson-Reed does not have a permanent principal?

Yes. It’s one reason my 8th grader picked a magnet. (The other of course was size/overcrowding.)

[Anonymous]

This really sounds like burnout all over the place.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The big issue with DCPS is that it’s only a 1 year contract. It does not encourage a long term view or commitment from applicants. Move up to get a principal position and then leave in 1-2 years for something better.

It also doesn’t help that DCPS’s model to top down with principals having much less autonomy as central office tries to control everything. Then when you don’t toe the line with them, they will let you go or won’t renew your contract. I think that is what happen with School without Walls HS principal.

It’s a dysfunctional set up.

His contract was renewed - he was FIRED in October when he stood up to central office

I thought he was insisting on an in-person test while refusing to reopen for in-person school.

Rumor is he was pushing to keep schools closed when they were trying to reopen but they claimed he didn’t follow proper lottery protocols to let kids into FS. Which honestly he hasn’t followed in years at either school. They just wanted him gone and to have someone who would toe the line and be controlled by central office.

I don't know the man but let's take a moment and dissect what you just posted, shall we?

Rumor is
So we start by repeating unfounded information as a basis for our post. Way to enhance your credibility from the start.

they claimed he didn’t follow proper lottery protocols to let kids into FS
Did he not follow proper protocols? Must these two things be mutually exclusive? Couldn't he have both wanted to keep schools closed and not followed protocols? If he did in fact do both then wouldn't they be well within their rights to fire him for violating protocols? Do you think that the lottery and admissions protocols should be followed only when admins like them? And otherwise they can be disregarded? Have you thought about how that works when an admin applies an unapproved standard you don't like?

Which honestly he hasn’t followed in years at either school
So now you tell us the pretend reason he was fired was activity in which he was engaged? Same questions as above as to why he should be allowed to ignore the protocols and rules.

have someone who would toe the line and be controlled by central office.
This confuses me. Isn't that what every management team in any job really wants; people who will follow the policies and procedures set forth by the organization? Policies you acknowledge he regularly violated? This isn't a situation where he was censured or fired for speaking truth to power; he can say whatever he wants. In truth he can do what he wants. But thee are consequences for violating your employer's policies.

No one actually knows the reason except Trogisch and central office personnel. But you took a long time dissecting that post. Hopefully you are not actually Trogisch because he should be enjoying retirement somewhere. But please trust that I have more knowledge on this than you do.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:This really sounds like burnout all over the place.

+1

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Is it true that Willson/Jackson-Reed does not have a permanent principal?

They had an interim principal this year. They are hiring a new permanent principal now for next year.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The big issue with DCPS is that it’s only a 1 year contract. It does not encourage a long term view or commitment from applicants. Move up to get a principal position and then leave in 1-2 years for something better.

It also doesn’t help that DCPS’s model to top down with principals having much less autonomy as central office tries to control everything. Then when you don’t toe the line with them, they will let you go or won’t renew your contract. I think that is what happen with School without Walls HS principal.

It’s a dysfunctional set up.

His contract was renewed - he was FIRED in October when he stood up to central office

I thought he was insisting on an in-person test while refusing to reopen for in-person school.

Rumor is he was pushing to keep schools closed when they were trying to reopen but they claimed he didn’t follow proper lottery protocols to let kids into FS. Which honestly he hasn’t followed in years at either school. They just wanted him gone and to have someone who would toe the line and be controlled by central office.

I don't know the man but let's take a moment and dissect what you just posted, shall we?

Rumor is
So we start by repeating unfounded information as a basis for our post. Way to enhance your credibility from the start.

they claimed he didn’t follow proper lottery protocols to let kids into FS
Did he not follow proper protocols? Must these two things be mutually exclusive? Couldn't he have both wanted to keep schools closed and not followed protocols? If he did in fact do both then wouldn't they be well within their rights to fire him for violating protocols? Do you think that the lottery and admissions protocols should be followed only when admins like them? And otherwise they can be disregarded? Have you thought about how that works when an admin applies an unapproved standard you don't like?

Which honestly he hasn’t followed in years at either school
So now you tell us the pretend reason he was fired was activity in which he was engaged? Same questions as above as to why he should be allowed to ignore the protocols and rules.

have someone who would toe the line and be controlled by central office.
This confuses me. Isn't that what every management team in any job really wants; people who will follow the policies and procedures set forth by the organization? Policies you acknowledge he regularly violated? This isn't a situation where he was censured or fired for speaking truth to power; he can say whatever he wants. In truth he can do what he wants. But thee are consequences for violating your employer's policies.

No one actually knows the reason except Trogisch and central office personnel. But you took a long time dissecting that post. Hopefully you are not actually Trogisch because he should be enjoying retirement somewhere. But please trust that I have more knowledge on this than you do.

Either you know or you don't. Since you are correct that only those two parties know what happened, and since I agree Trogisch is not here worrying about silly DCUM parents, you seem to be suggesting that you work in central and that because you do you have actual knowledge. And that you are here on DCUM violating obligations of confidentiality and willfully disclosing information that you know you should not. And you are doing this...to show how trustworthy you are?