DCI Parent Petition

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If you read the full letter and have ever worked under similar leadership, whether in a public or corporate setting, you’ll understand exactly what it’s describing. The fact that more than 100 teachers have left since the ED started speaks for itself.

The teacher retention issue, is the main issue. It doesn't matter if the school is offering the most advanced and most comprehensive list of IB courses and adding APs etc. if staff aren't there to provide high quality instruction and support students. I guess for kids that can walk themselves through curriculum online it's okay but good teachers that stay are what will make it a really good middle/high school. No idea if this ED is good for that or not.

DCI's teacher retention on the school report card is 73% - which is just about the charter average. While it's not great, has there been a decline over the recent years? Or has retention always been an issue (even before this particular ED and/or the union)? I am always surprised that in unionized charter environments pay and retention seem to be lower than in non-unionized ones. Not saying it's a union issue but wondering if the factors that cause staff to move in the direction of unionizing are entrenched and complex.

That’s an interesting question. I do think that you are right, there’s a lot going on. That said, several of the unions are relatively new and it can take a looooooong time to ratify a contract, and I believe things sort of freeze while that is under way in terms of comp, so that could be another contributing factor for some of the newer unions.

School report card is outdated. That is from 2 years ago? The rate was presented at the last board meeting in the 90’s.

[Anonymous]

DCI parent and as someone who is in a leadership position at work, you have to make decisions that is best for the whole and not everyone is going to be happy.

You have to see the big picture and not just the tree in front of you like many people do when they apply things to just themselves without thinking how it affects others. You need to see both sides of the issue which includes the school side too, not just your side.


The clock in issue. Maybe DCI was having a problem with teachers being consistently late and why they instituted it. If teachers are late a lot, then the school has to scramble and cover and find staff for that classroom until the teacher gets there. It also cuts into instruction time, etc…. If you are prompt and on time, what does it matter if you have to clock in? My staff do it daily. Now if you have a pattern of being late, then it’s easy to see how this would affect you and you would not be happy and bring up t he issue. I don’t see this as a big deal.

Not following the IB model? Yes the IB coordinator is gone. But they have replaced this role with staff. Are teachers not happy that the school is adding more AP courses and it might be more work for staff? Or they think this is the reason why the school is not faithful to the IB model? All the schools in the burbs with IB programs offer AP. I would also argue that it is absolutely beneficial for the high school because it gives IB kids a chance to take the course and get on their record high scores in addition to IB which gives them a huge advantage for college admissions. It also gives all kids in the high school more options and tracking for more rigorous classes. It’s a total win win for the students.

Above are just examples of some things I think about when looking at issues. It’s not valid to just present one side and not having substantial evidence and not offering what the response is from the school why they are implementing things.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:"Basic professional standards" and it's humans with lives who are being threatened with docked pay and consequences if they experience human needs like flat tires, cranky kids who won't move quickly in the morning, late busses. I'm on the outskirts of the DCI community but also in the DC education world, and I've NEVER heard of a school with a clock in system for grown adults. And that's just one aspect of admin infantilizing staff. The school used scare tactics on staff when the opportunity to unionize came up, spreading lies and making staff members feel like their jobs were at risk. The ED took a massive salary while working to ensure support staff like facilities barely make a living wage. The admin has a history of disrespecting their teachers and showing no faith in them. Saying that none of this appears serious is very much misunderstanding the matter and showing the same disrespect to staff that admin is doing.

Teachers are mad because they're expected to show up on time? Seriously?

Clocking in/out is a pretty normal in lots of the working world.

Do you clock in and out of your professional role? It's maybe normal in hourly, waged roles, but not for professionals who can be trusted to do their jobs and be humans. Odd that previous poster's small example is what people are latching onto when, if you read the seven page doc, there are so many more egregious issues.

No dog in this fight but I clock in and I’m a fed.

For a long time time card fraud was basically the only way to get fired

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:https://drive.google.com/file/d/1CtQkImW-3e63OCR5cJS9vXUJ3pwPN9fc/view?usp=drivesdk

Urging all DCI community members to read

Eh this just reads like sour grapes from some staff and teachers towards a new ED trying to impose some accountability on the school and figure out how to improve IB score outcomes.

None of this appears that serious, and some of it- complaining about progressive discipline for tardiness- feels like staff who are rebelling against basic professional standards.

You wouldn't happen to be the Chair of the DCI Board by any chance, would you? You seem to see the long list of actual concerns the same

[Anonymous]

It’s so hard to take concerns seriously when there’s a lot of equity language, it always feels pretextual. I’m always worried that the equity mafia is really angry about something else that the school can’t change.

[Anonymous]

Well, I just read the bio of the new high school principal. Doctorate, hispanic and spanish speaking. Worked in various roles as assistant principal, consultant, head of a bilingual school in Columbia, and did the IB diploma program himself.

He sounds like a good replacement for the high school. Of course the last principal was fantastic and loved and will be missed. He will be hard to replace but i’m optimistic.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I don't have a lot of insider info, but I think it's a snowballing kind of a situation. Per my kid's experience, there are a lot of young, inexperienced teachers who are not managing their life well, which probably leads the staff to infantilize them, which leads to a backlash. But that's what you get when you are limited by how much money you can pay your teachers. The good ones leave really quickly, the bad ones stay and become more and more disgruntled.

But the funds available to pay teachers have not drastically diminished in the last 3 or 4 years, yet the steady stream of the better teachers that were there for awhile has turned into a gush of exits and too many are known and widely credited as great teachers.

And really, when 80% of staff vote and 94% of them vote no confidence in the Exec Director, how is that not a crisis? Even if many in leardership think the issues are somehow not urgent, how is that high a % of staff saying the Exec Director affirmatively has to go how is that NOT an urgent issue needing action?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It’s so hard to take concerns seriously when there’s a lot of equity language, it always feels pretextual. I’m always worried that the equity mafia is really angry about something else that the school can’t change.

The detailed letter the staff sent to the board hardly mentioned "equity". And had a lot of specific examples of concerns, including things like leadership contracting with their own family members on the DCI's dime, and not continuing contracts of very key and lauded staff for no clearly stated reason (but that staff member notified their contract won't be continued next year after that staff member raised concerns about their job description changing so much after start of school year that it was becoming impossible to do the main job they were hired to do). What the Board does with it will tell the entire school community a tremendous amount. Or what the Board does not do with it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't have a lot of insider info, but I think it's a snowballing kind of a situation. Per my kid's experience, there are a lot of young, inexperienced teachers who are not managing their life well, which probably leads the staff to infantilize them, which leads to a backlash. But that's what you get when you are limited by how much money you can pay your teachers. The good ones leave really quickly, the bad ones stay and become more and more disgruntled.

But the funds available to pay teachers have not drastically diminished in the last 3 or 4 years, yet the steady stream of the better teachers that were there for awhile has turned into a gush of exits and too many are known and widely credited as great teachers.

And really, when 80% of staff vote and 94% of them vote no confidence in the Exec Director, how is that not a crisis? Even if many in leardership think the issues are somehow not urgent, how is that high a % of staff saying the Exec Director affirmatively has to go how is that NOT an urgent issue needing action?

I don’t know all the details of what is going on but the school has now responded from the last meeting that there is going to be open sessions for parents and staff to discuss concerns with leadership. There is going to be open board meetings to discuss concerns.

So yes, school is moving on this. But the teachers really need to come up with concrete and valid reasons about what the issues are and the schools response to why they implemented the change if they want to have any case.

Not these generalized soft allegations with no substantial support.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't have a lot of insider info, but I think it's a snowballing kind of a situation. Per my kid's experience, there are a lot of young, inexperienced teachers who are not managing their life well, which probably leads the staff to infantilize them, which leads to a backlash. But that's what you get when you are limited by how much money you can pay your teachers. The good ones leave really quickly, the bad ones stay and become more and more disgruntled.

But the funds available to pay teachers have not drastically diminished in the last 3 or 4 years, yet the steady stream of the better teachers that were there for awhile has turned into a gush of exits and too many are known and widely credited as great teachers.

And really, when 80% of staff vote and 94% of them vote no confidence in the Exec Director, how is that not a crisis? Even if many in leardership think the issues are somehow not urgent, how is that high a % of staff saying the Exec Director affirmatively has to go how is that NOT an urgent issue needing action?

I don’t know all the details of what is going on but the school has now responded from the last meeting that there is going to be open sessions for parents and staff to discuss concerns with leadership. There is going to be open board meetings to discuss concerns.

So yes, school is moving on this. But the teachers really need to come up with concrete and valid reasons about what the issues are and the schools response to why they implemented the change if they want to have any case.

Not these generalized soft allegations with no substantial support.

Did you read the letter? Lots of concrete and valid issues listed in the 6+ pages. And staff members were desperate to share their concerns at the last board meeting, when they were shut down repeatedly

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:"Basic professional standards" and it's humans with lives who are being threatened with docked pay and consequences if they experience human needs like flat tires, cranky kids who won't move quickly in the morning, late busses. I'm on the outskirts of the DCI community but also in the DC education world, and I've NEVER heard of a school with a clock in system for grown adults. And that's just one aspect of admin infantilizing staff. The school used scare tactics on staff when the opportunity to unionize came up, spreading lies and making staff members feel like their jobs were at risk. The ED took a massive salary while working to ensure support staff like facilities barely make a living wage. The admin has a history of disrespecting their teachers and showing no faith in them. Saying that none of this appears serious is very much misunderstanding the matter and showing the same disrespect to staff that admin is doing.

Teachers are mad because they're expected to show up on time? Seriously?

Clocking in/out is a pretty normal in lots of the working world.

Do you clock in and out of your professional role? It's maybe normal in hourly, waged roles, but not for professionals who can be trusted to do their jobs and be humans. Odd that previous poster's small example is what people are latching onto when, if you read the seven page doc, there are so many more egregious issues.

No dog in this fight but I clock in and I’m a fed.

I'm a former fed and we didn't clock in but at one point a new manager came in and suddenly everyone had to report their exact work schedule and post it on their cubicle and let's just say that did not help morale and nearly caused a mutiny. It's more of a matter of is there mutual respect or are you being treated like a ... well, like a teenager at a yogurt shop.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't have a lot of insider info, but I think it's a snowballing kind of a situation. Per my kid's experience, there are a lot of young, inexperienced teachers who are not managing their life well, which probably leads the staff to infantilize them, which leads to a backlash. But that's what you get when you are limited by how much money you can pay your teachers. The good ones leave really quickly, the bad ones stay and become more and more disgruntled.

But the funds available to pay teachers have not drastically diminished in the last 3 or 4 years, yet the steady stream of the better teachers that were there for awhile has turned into a gush of exits and too many are known and widely credited as great teachers.

And really, when 80% of staff vote and 94% of them vote no confidence in the Exec Director, how is that not a crisis? Even if many in leardership think the issues are somehow not urgent, how is that high a % of staff saying the Exec Director affirmatively has to go how is that NOT an urgent issue needing action?

I don’t know all the details of what is going on but the school has now responded from the last meeting that there is going to be open sessions for parents and staff to discuss concerns with leadership. There is going to be open board meetings to discuss concerns.

So yes, school is moving on this. But the teachers really need to come up with concrete and valid reasons about what the issues are and the schools response to why they implemented the change if they want to have any case.

Not these generalized soft allegations with no substantial support.

Did you read the letter? Lots of concrete and valid issues listed in the 6+ pages. And staff members were desperate to share their concerns at the last board meeting, when they were shut down repeatedly

I read the letter, and I support the cause if only because staff/teacher morale is very important. But it does not pin down specifics so I too was left wondering ok but what "really" happened here. There is a lot of language but I think there's a story here we aren't seeing.

The letter was written carefully to reflect on the school's "pillars" rather than give personal details, which is fine, but makes it hard to know what the heck is going on.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:DCI parent and as someone who is in a leadership position at work, you have to make decisions that is best for the whole and not everyone is going to be happy.

You have to see the big picture and not just the tree in front of you like many people do when they apply things to just themselves without thinking how it affects others. You need to see both sides of the issue which includes the school side too, not just your side.


The clock in issue. Maybe DCI was having a problem with teachers being consistently late and why they instituted it. If teachers are late a lot, then the school has to scramble and cover and find staff for that classroom until the teacher gets there. It also cuts into instruction time, etc…. If you are prompt and on time, what does it matter if you have to clock in? My staff do it daily. Now if you have a pattern of being late, then it’s easy to see how this would affect you and you would not be happy and bring up t he issue. I don’t see this as a big deal.

Not following the IB model? Yes the IB coordinator is gone. But they have replaced this role with staff. Are teachers not happy that the school is adding more AP courses and it might be more work for staff? Or they think this is the reason why the school is not faithful to the IB model? All the schools in the burbs with IB programs offer AP. I would also argue that it is absolutely beneficial for the high school because it gives IB kids a chance to take the course and get on their record high scores in addition to IB which gives them a huge advantage for college admissions. It also gives all kids in the high school more options and tracking for more rigorous classes. It’s a total win win for the students.

Above are just examples of some things I think about when looking at issues. It’s not valid to just present one side and not having substantial evidence and not offering what the response is from the school why they are implementing things.

Yes, sometimes change is inevitable when viewed from a broader leadership perspective. No one is disputing that. However, execution matters, especially for someone coming in from the outside. In this case, it appears the Executive Director may have moved too quickly to implement changes without first taking the time to observe, build relationships, and earn the trust that is essential for those changes to succeed.

[Anonymous]

Well, OP, what is your position?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:https://drive.google.com/file/d/1CtQkImW-3e63OCR5cJS9vXUJ3pwPN9fc/view?usp=drivesdk

Urging all DCI community members to read

Eh this just reads like sour grapes from some staff and teachers towards a new ED trying to impose some accountability on the school and figure out how to improve IB score outcomes.

None of this appears that serious, and some of it- complaining about progressive discipline for tardiness- feels like staff who are rebelling against basic professional standards.

You wouldn't happen to be the Chair of the DCI Board by any chance, would you? You seem to see the long list of actual concerns the same

I thought the exact same thing. Apparently Alex Pardo has found this thread. She’s a disgrace.