Reducing personnel at central office

[Anonymous]

There's a personnel shortage in a lot of places versus the work needed, and line staff at central is no exception. It's the upper-level administration, one to three levels below the Superintendent, depending on the particular office, who represent bloat and who introduce inefficiency by driving unofficial policy goals to the detriment of attention to school needs.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am an elementary teacher in the county. Some areas of Central office are so understaffed, and other positions could be easily cut. For example, the county added 12 county-level math content coaches this year. They took 12 hard-working school-based teachers AWAY from working with students and placed them in Central in advisory roles. It is a horrible waste of money.

I think we need someone to come in and really evaluate each position and see what can be reduced or combined and what is essential.

Aren’t math coaches assigned to a number of schools to work with teachers to deliver better math instruction, help analyze their data, teach the curriculum, work with students? If that works they will actually be helping more students .

The problem is that it sounds great, but is not effective and does not benefit the students. Each of these new math coaches is assigned to 4 schools (at least at the elementary level). They are coming to meetings and creating more work and data for the teachers. They are cherry-picking data, so maybe there looks like there are minor gains? Our school is very resentful and we are not seeing increases in anything except workload. Our students struggle due to having no home support, being new to the country, food insecurity, etc. Another person coming to meetings does not directly support them. Only people not in schools would think it does.

What they need to do is provide differentiated curriculum materials to all teachers in all schools. It would be so nice if they reduced the workload for teachers instead of increasing it. If they did that, they would probably also see increased data (as long as they cherry-pick correctly), help more schools, need fewer central office staff, and have fewer resentful teachers.

And it reduces central office staff- even by a few- the point of this thread. Every area needs to be scrutinized.

[Anonymous]

Too many admin critters with vague titles at central office. There are also a lot of staff that seem important but have very little impact in schools like the equity office personnel. So many useless trainings that don’t help teachers or impact students in a measurable way.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am an elementary teacher in the county. Some areas of Central office are so understaffed, and other positions could be easily cut. For example, the county added 12 county-level math content coaches this year. They took 12 hard-working school-based teachers AWAY from working with students and placed them in Central in advisory roles. It is a horrible waste of money.

I think we need someone to come in and really evaluate each position and see what can be reduced or combined and what is essential.

Aren’t math coaches assigned to a number of schools to work with teachers to deliver better math instruction, help analyze their data, teach the curriculum, work with students? If that works they will actually be helping more students .

The problem is that it sounds great, but is not effective and does not benefit the students. Each of these new math coaches is assigned to 4 schools (at least at the elementary level). They are coming to meetings and creating more work and data for the teachers. They are cherry-picking data, so maybe there looks like there are minor gains? Our school is very resentful and we are not seeing increases in anything except workload. Our students struggle due to having no home support, being new to the country, food insecurity, etc. Another person coming to meetings does not directly support them. Only people not in schools would think it does.

What they need to do is provide differentiated curriculum materials to all teachers in all schools. It would be so nice if they reduced the workload for teachers instead of increasing it. If they did that, they would probably also see increased data (as long as they cherry-pick correctly), help more schools, need fewer central office staff, and have fewer resentful teachers.

And it reduces central office staff- even by a few- the point of this thread. Every area needs to be scrutinized.

Help me understand what this would look like for the Eureka Math curriculum. I’ve seen the Eureka math book sets. I’ve looked at the Eureka math site. There are problem sets, it’s available in multiple languages, there are additional problems if needed for practice. I’m assuming schools have various math manipulative. What other things would you want or be looking for to help differentiate?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:There's a personnel shortage in a lot of places versus the work needed, and line staff at central is no exception. It's the upper-level administration, one to three levels below the Superintendent, depending on the particular office, who represent bloat and who introduce inefficiency by driving unofficial policy goals to the detriment of attention to school needs.

+1000

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I've read MCPS has like 2X the amount of support staff as FCPS.

Don't believe most of the things you read on DCUM.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:There's a personnel shortage in a lot of places versus the work needed, and line staff at central is no exception. It's the upper-level administration, one to three levels below the Superintendent, depending on the particular office, who represent bloat and who introduce inefficiency by driving unofficial policy goals to the detriment of attention to school needs.

I think this is on point. There are always new initiatives or requirements that necessitate “managing” whether created by MCPS, the state or federal government. I wonder how many of those initiatives and programs are still in place five to seven years later. Are they worth the expense and stress on school based teachers and staff? It’s just another thing piled onto the teachers plates, this is another reason teachers are leaving. Has anyone seen a study of how many programs have been implemented and how long until a new one replaced it and how much was spent?

[Anonymous]

Don’t forget that the special Ed department is in an actual crisis. Many many schools are left with ZERO certified sped staff (especially in discrete programs such as autism or SCB) and the staff in home school model (general ed inclusion for those who don’t know) are drowning in paperwork and cannot get consults from their instructional specialists or supervisors because there is not enough support in the SPED department. Also- please note that there was ZERO budget for home school model teachers to spend on instructional materials this year. Changes need to made immediately in that department

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:There's a personnel shortage in a lot of places versus the work needed, and line staff at central is no exception. It's the upper-level administration, one to three levels below the Superintendent, depending on the particular office, who represent bloat and who introduce inefficiency by driving unofficial policy goals to the detriment of attention to school needs.

There are additional Director positions earmarked in OSSWB in the FY25 Operating Budget. Makes no sense when there are cuts everywhere else.

[Anonymous]

How many people at the CO are there to focus on equity for those worthy of equity?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So many comments about reducing overhead at central office. Is this only the hungerford drive location? How many employees are there of the central office? Is there a budget that shows the total salaries spent for central office personnel?

Students and staff

Students 160,554 (2022-23)
Teachers 13,994 (2022-23)
Staff 25,232 (2022-23)

In those numbers, "Staff" includes staff at the schools and elsewhere. Principals, secretaries, building, security, cafeteria, etc.

Yes, paras and library assistants as well.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:They have achievement specialist who used to be teachers but now, go around schools and meet with leadership. They could be cut. They have about 60 parent community coordinators who work from home. They could be cut. They have social workers who work with immigrant students, they should be sent directly to schools and supervised by principals. The social workers work out of Rocking Horse Road Center. Rocking Horse Road Center is another building filled with Central Office staff. They have a Spring Mill office off Kemp Mill Road filled with Central Office. English Manor filled with central office. Some of the Central Office positions are needed, but others are not. Just look to see who gets their PHD while working for Central Office. Those are the people that should be cut.

My high farms, 70% Latinx school needs ours. Although she technically works from home, she is rarely home. She’s out visiting families and is at our school at least two days a week for meetings. My school would be even more dysfunctional without her.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They have achievement specialist who used to be teachers but now, go around schools and meet with leadership. They could be cut. They have about 60 parent community coordinators who work from home. They could be cut. They have social workers who work with immigrant students, they should be sent directly to schools and supervised by principals. The social workers work out of Rocking Horse Road Center. Rocking Horse Road Center is another building filled with Central Office staff. They have a Spring Mill office off Kemp Mill Road filled with Central Office. English Manor filled with central office. Some of the Central Office positions are needed, but others are not. Just look to see who gets their PHD while working for Central Office. Those are the people that should be cut.

My high farms, 70% Latinx school needs ours. Although she technically works from home, she is rarely home. She’s out visiting families and is at our school at least two days a week for meetings. My school would be even more dysfunctional without her.

People think that when they don’t see a specialist, that specialist isn't doing anything, when really they're where they're needed the most, everyone in central with jobs like that has limits to teleworking and submits records of their day as well.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:There's a personnel shortage in a lot of places versus the work needed, and line staff at central is no exception. It's the upper-level administration, one to three levels below the Superintendent, depending on the particular office, who represent bloat and who introduce inefficiency by driving unofficial policy goals to the detriment of attention to school needs.

[phone]

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Don’t forget that the special Ed department is in an actual crisis. Many many schools are left with ZERO certified sped staff (especially in discrete programs such as autism or SCB) and the staff in home school model (general ed inclusion for those who don’t know) are drowning in paperwork and cannot get consults from their instructional specialists or supervisors because there is not enough support in the SPED department. Also- please note that there was ZERO budget for home school model teachers to spend on instructional materials this year. Changes need to made immediately in that department

The terrible state of the Office of Special Education is the next big MCPS scandal that should be the focus of investigation.