Ludlow-Taylor principal suddenly leaving?

[Anonymous]

So... What did folks think of Principal Daniel? I hadn’t actually heard the “rumors” so was caught off guard by the whole thing.

[Anonymous]

I think that 1) LT runs itself thanks to the great teachers so Principal doesn’t really matter that much and 2) This school year will be a total disaster for all no matter the school or the principal ...

[Anonymous]

I actually agree with the comment directly above this one. The school is solid. The leadership is just the face of the school. There is a strong team of hardworking staff behind the scenes - people running things whose names you don't know because they intentionally stay behind the scenes.

With that said I am hoping that Daniels does well. It has been challenging for black females leading elementary schools in areas that are quickly gentrifying. She should be prepared to go toe to toe with some of the more vocal (and covert) parents at the school.

What do we know about her so far?

[Anonymous]

LT will be fine, or at least as good as any DCPS school will be this year. I think it's great that there will be two black women leading our school!!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote: I actually agree with the comment directly above this one. The school is solid. The leadership is just the face of the school. There is a strong team of hardworking staff behind the scenes - people running things whose names you don't know because they intentionally stay behind the scenes.

With that said I am hoping that Daniels does well. It has been challenging for black females leading elementary schools in areas that are quickly gentrifying. She should be prepared to go toe to toe with some of the more vocal (and covert) parents at the school.

What do we know about her so far?

I agree the school is strong and will likely be fine. But TBH I wouldn't pick her to lead a gentrifying school. She was an AP at our school and I think she did a good job (and the kids totally loved her), but I always felt like she kind of had a wall of professionalism up and I couldn't really get to know her. And she had a more top-down attitude than the principal did, or at least the principal knew how to be top-down while seeming collaborative. Ms. Daniel was young and not as experienced at the time-- maybe she's better now. I hope being at Langley gave her more experience with a gentrifying school and what it's like to have a motivated group of gentrifying preschool parents.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: I actually agree with the comment directly above this one. The school is solid. The leadership is just the face of the school. There is a strong team of hardworking staff behind the scenes - people running things whose names you don't know because they intentionally stay behind the scenes.

With that said I am hoping that Daniels does well. It has been challenging for black females leading elementary schools in areas that are quickly gentrifying. She should be prepared to go toe to toe with some of the more vocal (and covert) parents at the school.

What do we know about her so far?

I agree the school is strong and will likely be fine. But TBH I wouldn't pick her to lead a gentrifying school. She was an AP at our school and I think she did a good job (and the kids totally loved her), but I always felt like she kind of had a wall of professionalism up and I couldn't really get to know her. And she had a more top-down attitude than the principal did, or at least the principal knew how to be top-down while seeming collaborative. Ms. Daniel was young and not as experienced at the time-- maybe she's better now. I hope being at Langley gave her more experience with a gentrifying school and what it's like to have a motivated group of gentrifying preschool parents.

While I obviously recognize that LT is gentrifying quickly, it is way farther along than Langley. To wit, LT is way past having a motivated group of gentrifying preschool parents... There are, I believe, zero preschool parents on the PTO unless they also have older kids.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: I actually agree with the comment directly above this one. The school is solid. The leadership is just the face of the school. There is a strong team of hardworking staff behind the scenes - people running things whose names you don't know because they intentionally stay behind the scenes.

With that said I am hoping that Daniels does well. It has been challenging for black females leading elementary schools in areas that are quickly gentrifying. She should be prepared to go toe to toe with some of the more vocal (and covert) parents at the school.

What do we know about her so far?

I agree the school is strong and will likely be fine. But TBH I wouldn't pick her to lead a gentrifying school. She was an AP at our school and I think she did a good job (and the kids totally loved her), but I always felt like she kind of had a wall of professionalism up and I couldn't really get to know her. And she had a more top-down attitude than the principal did, or at least the principal knew how to be top-down while seeming collaborative. Ms. Daniel was young and not as experienced at the time-- maybe she's better now. I hope being at Langley gave her more experience with a gentrifying school and what it's like to have a motivated group of gentrifying preschool parents.

While I obviously recognize that LT is gentrifying quickly, it is way farther along than Langley. To wit, LT is way past having a motivated group of gentrifying preschool parents... There are, I believe, zero preschool parents on the PTO unless they also have older kids.

Yeah, I know, and honestly I'm kinda surprised she wanted to go to LT. It seemed like her career passion was for the more at-risk kids, and I liked that about her. It's a tough juggle for a young principal to balance the different communities and their expectations, and also deliver the results that DCPS demands. But I would also think LT's more-gentrified state will mean that some of these issues like not giving the kids a vast amount of sugar have already been addressed and parents are much, much more content with the school than they were at Langley in 2016-2018, so there may be less tension. Back then it really felt like the state of the school was so dire, PTA and leadership both felt a lot of pressure to tackle every issue.

Overall, I would say LT will be fine, and Ms. Daniel is certainly motivated and competent and has several years as an AP under her belt. You guys needed someone on short notice, so you're getting someone who's perhaps a bit earlier in her career than would be ideal. But knowing what I know about DCPS principals, I'd say you're getting a good enough deal here. No principal is perfect!

[Anonymous]

Also keep in mind that the outgoing principal was incredibly green but again because of the strong staff was able to come out looking like he knew what he was doing (he didn't but was quick to acknowledge that he faked it until he could make it.) I think it will be a very challenging year with 2 new administrators who seem to both have strong personalities and more experience working with needier communities. The last time LT had strong black leadership in place the gentrifiers pushed her out. I think Daniels should look at this opportunity as a learning opportunity. Ultimately the LT parents will get what they want...they always do.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: I actually agree with the comment directly above this one. The school is solid. The leadership is just the face of the school. There is a strong team of hardworking staff behind the scenes - people running things whose names you don't know because they intentionally stay behind the scenes.

With that said I am hoping that Daniels does well. It has been challenging for black females leading elementary schools in areas that are quickly gentrifying. She should be prepared to go toe to toe with some of the more vocal (and covert) parents at the school.

What do we know about her so far?

I agree the school is strong and will likely be fine. But TBH I wouldn't pick her to lead a gentrifying school. She was an AP at our school and I think she did a good job (and the kids totally loved her), but I always felt like she kind of had a wall of professionalism up and I couldn't really get to know her. And she had a more top-down attitude than the principal did, or at least the principal knew how to be top-down while seeming collaborative. Ms. Daniel was young and not as experienced at the time-- maybe she's better now. I hope being at Langley gave her more experience with a gentrifying school and what it's like to have a motivated group of gentrifying preschool parents.

wow.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: I actually agree with the comment directly above this one. The school is solid. The leadership is just the face of the school. There is a strong team of hardworking staff behind the scenes - people running things whose names you don't know because they intentionally stay behind the scenes.

With that said I am hoping that Daniels does well. It has been challenging for black females leading elementary schools in areas that are quickly gentrifying. She should be prepared to go toe to toe with some of the more vocal (and covert) parents at the school.

What do we know about her so far?

I agree the school is strong and will likely be fine. But TBH I wouldn't pick her to lead a gentrifying school. She was an AP at our school and I think she did a good job (and the kids totally loved her), but I always felt like she kind of had a wall of professionalism up and I couldn't really get to know her. And she had a more top-down attitude than the principal did, or at least the principal knew how to be top-down while seeming collaborative. Ms. Daniel was young and not as experienced at the time-- maybe she's better now. I hope being at Langley gave her more experience with a gentrifying school and what it's like to have a motivated group of gentrifying preschool parents.

you realize she’s running the school for everyone, not just the “motivated group of gentrifying preschool parents,” right? and your digs at her for being professional? wtf?

[Anonymous]

Principal Smith had just started pull outs for high achievers — in part because their PARRC scores last year showed regression among high 4s/low 5s and that’s actually what killed them on some of the OSSE star rating metrics. The fact it was motivated by test scores is dumb but fairly predictable, but I hope Principal Daniel and the new AP keep those pullouts. I’m all for additional help for underperforming kids, but if you’re pitching class content at getting kids to 4 on PARRC, I want additional supplementation for kids who probably get 4s and even 5s if they didn’t even go to school. I don’t mean super geniuses, I mean regular smart kids from privileged enough backgrounds that tests accurately reflect their capabilities and who now make up a big chunk of the school. I don’t want plenty of 4s on PARRC to be the only undifferentiated goal.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: I actually agree with the comment directly above this one. The school is solid. The leadership is just the face of the school. There is a strong team of hardworking staff behind the scenes - people running things whose names you don't know because they intentionally stay behind the scenes.

With that said I am hoping that Daniels does well. It has been challenging for black females leading elementary schools in areas that are quickly gentrifying. She should be prepared to go toe to toe with some of the more vocal (and covert) parents at the school.

What do we know about her so far?

I agree the school is strong and will likely be fine. But TBH I wouldn't pick her to lead a gentrifying school. She was an AP at our school and I think she did a good job (and the kids totally loved her), but I always felt like she kind of had a wall of professionalism up and I couldn't really get to know her. And she had a more top-down attitude than the principal did, or at least the principal knew how to be top-down while seeming collaborative. Ms. Daniel was young and not as experienced at the time-- maybe she's better now. I hope being at Langley gave her more experience with a gentrifying school and what it's like to have a motivated group of gentrifying preschool parents.

you realize she’s running the school for everyone, not just the “motivated group of gentrifying preschool parents,” right? and your digs at her for being professional? wtf?

I liked that she focused on that at-risk kids. But it makes me wonder why the principalship of LT is appealing to her. Tunning LT requires being good at dealing with higher-income parents, even though they are ridiculous and oblivious sometimes. The principal that we had was more skillful in managing them. It's a good thing that she was always professional, but she seemed to keep people more at arms length, compared to the principal (who honestly was a bit too chatty with parents). LT is going to be just fine. I was just kind of surprised because I always felt her career passion was with at-risk kids.

[Anonymous]

Again I think it was a poor placement for both her and the new AP because as you said LT is more about appeasing the very involved parents more than issues with the children. Yes there a few behavior issues and staff personality conflicts but the biggest role in that position is to keep those parents happy. Sad but true.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: I actually agree with the comment directly above this one. The school is solid. The leadership is just the face of the school. There is a strong team of hardworking staff behind the scenes - people running things whose names you don't know because they intentionally stay behind the scenes.

With that said I am hoping that Daniels does well. It has been challenging for black females leading elementary schools in areas that are quickly gentrifying. She should be prepared to go toe to toe with some of the more vocal (and covert) parents at the school.

What do we know about her so far?

I agree the school is strong and will likely be fine. But TBH I wouldn't pick her to lead a gentrifying school. She was an AP at our school and I think she did a good job (and the kids totally loved her), but I always felt like she kind of had a wall of professionalism up and I couldn't really get to know her. And she had a more top-down attitude than the principal did, or at least the principal knew how to be top-down while seeming collaborative. Ms. Daniel was young and not as experienced at the time-- maybe she's better now. I hope being at Langley gave her more experience with a gentrifying school and what it's like to have a motivated group of gentrifying preschool parents.

you realize she’s running the school for everyone, not just the “motivated group of gentrifying preschool parents,” right? and your digs at her for being professional? wtf?

I liked that she focused on that at-risk kids. But it makes me wonder why the principalship of LT is appealing to her. Tunning LT requires being good at dealing with higher-income parents, even though they are ridiculous and oblivious sometimes. The principal that we had was more skillful in managing them. It's a good thing that she was always professional, but she seemed to keep people more at arms length, compared to the principal (who honestly was a bit too chatty with parents). LT is going to be just fine. I was just kind of surprised because I always felt her career passion was with at-risk kids.

[Anonymous]

And yes, she will get a hell of a fight if she decides to take the focus off of the top tier kids and shifts it to the low performers. She should tread lightly.

Anonymous wrote:Principal Smith had just started pull outs for high achievers — in part because their PARRC scores last year showed regression among high 4s/low 5s and that’s actually what killed them on some of the OSSE star rating metrics. The fact it was motivated by test scores is dumb but fairly predictable, but I hope Principal Daniel and the new AP keep those pullouts. I’m all for additional help for underperforming kids, but if you’re pitching class content at getting kids to 4 on PARRC, I want additional supplementation for kids who probably get 4s and even 5s if they didn’t even go to school. I don’t mean super geniuses, I mean regular smart kids from privileged enough backgrounds that tests accurately reflect their capabilities and who now make up a big chunk of the school. I don’t want plenty of 4s on PARRC to be the only undifferentiated goal.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:And yes, she will get a hell of a fight if she decides to take the focus off of the top tier kids and shifts it to the low performers. She should tread lightly.

Anonymous wrote:Principal Smith had just started pull outs for high achievers — in part because their PARRC scores last year showed regression among high 4s/low 5s and that’s actually what killed them on some of the OSSE star rating metrics. The fact it was motivated by test scores is dumb but fairly predictable, but I hope Principal Daniel and the new AP keep those pullouts. I’m all for additional help for underperforming kids, but if you’re pitching class content at getting kids to 4 on PARRC, I want additional supplementation for kids who probably get 4s and even 5s if they didn’t even go to school. I don’t mean super geniuses, I mean regular smart kids from privileged enough backgrounds that tests accurately reflect their capabilities and who now make up a big chunk of the school. I don’t want plenty of 4s on PARRC to be the only undifferentiated goal.

Who says she can't do both? That's what should be happening, although a slightly greater focus on earlier learners makes sense. If I see my advanced learner slip, I wouldn't necessarily take it up with the principal but the teacher.