New Superintendent to be named on February 8th

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:As far as I'm concerned, the people who insisted that the schools be closed to in-person learning for over a year - for whatever arbitrary reason - caused many of these problems (widening learning gap between the FARMS and non-FARMS, students suffering socially and mentally, etc.) and McKnight is doing her best to clean up. Clean up will take more than the few months she's been superintendent.

You're talking about the deadly pandemic that killed millions worldwide?

[Anonymous]

I will tell who is running the schools and it is the principals. Principals get minimal from central office AT BEST! We have kept schools running with limited communication, directions, goals, and direction. Also, policies change literally in 10 minutes sometimes, and we have had to constantly be on unplanned calls to make amends to messages we need to send out, and calls and announcements to family when things do not arrive in a timely manner as promised (masks and tests). It has been VERY exhausting and I know many principals throwing in the towel. Don't believe me? Go to MCPS jobs and look at how many principals are looking to leave. If you are happy with your child's school, thank the principal. If you went to 10 MCPS schools, you will notice the very noticeable variants from school to school. No school has a uniform message, plan, and structure.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I will tell who is running the schools and it is the principals. Principals get minimal from central office AT BEST! We have kept schools running with limited communication, directions, goals, and direction. Also, policies change literally in 10 minutes sometimes, and we have had to constantly be on unplanned calls to make amends to messages we need to send out, and calls and announcements to family when things do not arrive in a timely manner as promised (masks and tests). It has been VERY exhausting and I know many principals throwing in the towel. Don't believe me? Go to MCPS jobs and look at how many principals are looking to leave. If you are happy with your child's school, thank the principal. If you went to 10 MCPS schools, you will notice the very noticeable variants from school to school. No school has a uniform message, plan, and structure.

This is true. Principals have been very unhappy with central office

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I will tell who is running the schools and it is the principals. Principals get minimal from central office AT BEST! We have kept schools running with limited communication, directions, goals, and direction. Also, policies change literally in 10 minutes sometimes, and we have had to constantly be on unplanned calls to make amends to messages we need to send out, and calls and announcements to family when things do not arrive in a timely manner as promised (masks and tests). It has been VERY exhausting and I know many principals throwing in the towel. Don't believe me? Go to MCPS jobs and look at how many principals are looking to leave. If you are happy with your child's school, thank the principal. If you went to 10 MCPS schools, you will notice the very noticeable variants from school to school. No school has a uniform message, plan, and structure.

This is true. Principals have been very unhappy with central office

+1

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The situation is too tough to manage. It's best to stay silent sometime. I can honestly say I wouldn't know what to do either if in this situation. It's an entire county school system, not just your family. It's harder than you think to make decisions that involve thousands of people vs our own 4 nuclear family members.

There is literally nothing Dr. McKnight could have done or not done that wouldn't have caused some stakeholder to scream. That's the nature of managing a 160,000 person school system in the middle of completely polarizing pandemic. I am glad that schools stayed open and think the conversation is being dominated by the loud disgruntleds who seem to want school closed. I suspect that the majority is more like me -- quiet and just want to stay focused on our kids' learning and their routines.

Correct but they should have gone virtual for 3 weeks coming back from break given the surge. The outbreak was not her fault but she could have handled it better. Kids went weeks without an education between students/staff being out sick.

You are one of those "loud disgruntleds" that PP was talking about.

Going to virtual for 3 weeks would have pissed off THOUSANDS more people.

Honestly, she screwed up the roll out of the color coded metrics. But the approach was sound: school by school basis of closure. No system wide closure

And what about the thousands pissed who got covid from those not being cautious. What about the thousands of kids who missed school out sick? What about the teachers/staff out sick? All so you can have your free child care. A child brings it home and the entire family gets sick.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I will tell who is running the schools and it is the principals. Principals get minimal from central office AT BEST! We have kept schools running with limited communication, directions, goals, and direction. Also, policies change literally in 10 minutes sometimes, and we have had to constantly be on unplanned calls to make amends to messages we need to send out, and calls and announcements to family when things do not arrive in a timely manner as promised (masks and tests). It has been VERY exhausting and I know many principals throwing in the towel. Don't believe me? Go to MCPS jobs and look at how many principals are looking to leave. If you are happy with your child's school, thank the principal. If you went to 10 MCPS schools, you will notice the very noticeable variants from school to school. No school has a uniform message, plan, and structure.

This is true. Principals have been very unhappy with central office

+1

I'm in agreement, but I'd caution them that there were "up and comers" that were "consulted" as part of the board's Superintendent selection. I took a closer look at the list of community organizations.

- AFRICAN AMERICAN STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT ACTION GROUP (AASAAG)
Bakari Haynes, Assistant Principal, Clarksburg HS
Frances M Frost, Asst. to Associate MCPS Superintendent

- LATINO STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT ACTION GROUP (LSAAG)
Nyurka Morales, Assistant Principal, Northwest HS

- LEAAP-League of Educators for Asian American Progress
Khanny Yang, MCPS Director of Leadership Development

-APASAAG – Asian Pacific American Student Achievement Action Group
Anita Chan, Principal Intern at Montgomery County Public Schools

Ting Mei Chau of the Asian Pacific American Students Achievement Group began her Monday meeting testimony by passing out red envelopes to school board members. “Ms. Chau, the word for ‘bribery’ in Chinese …,” board President Michael Durso quipped. “Until it’s proven, I’m still innocent,” she replied, before assuring the viewing public that the envelopes contained thank-you notes and fortune cookies rather than cash.
Asian-American Parents, Students Advocate for Closed Schools on Lunar New Year
https://bethesdamagazine.com/bethesda-beat/schools/asian-american-parents-students-advocate-for-closed-schools-on-lunar-new-year/

- CAPA-MC Chinese American Parents Association of Montgomery County
Julie Yang, president of the Chinese American Parents Association of Montgomery County, said members of her group leapt at the chance to push for school closures on Lunar New Year and wanted to bolster their survey responses by testifying in person at a school board meeting. She asked the board members Monday to take the same approach with Lunar New Year and Eid al-Fitr by scheduling professional days on both dates.
Asian-American Parents, Students Advocate for Closed Schools on Lunar New Year
https://bethesdamagazine.com/bethesda-beat/schools/asian-american-parents-students-advocate-for-closed-schools-on-lunar-new-year/

(NOTE: the MCPS Administrative Day was February 1, 2022 - Lunar New Year)

[Anonymous]

It will be interesting to see if any of these interim and associate P's get promoted?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It will be interesting to see if any of these interim and associate P's get promoted?

My principal friends have been shocked into silence. I think even those who expected her to be appointed are stunned now that it has actually happened. It’s a giant F U to to teachers and principals, and I think this is the stunned calm before the storm. I wonder what will happen next. Probably MCEA will be the first to agitate.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It will be interesting to see if any of these interim and associate P's get promoted?

My principal friends have been shocked into silence. I think even those who expected her to be appointed are stunned now that it has actually happened. It’s a giant F U to to teachers and principals, and I think this is the stunned calm before the storm. I wonder what will happen next. Probably MCEA will be the first to agitate.

What will MCEA do about the Apple Ballot? Haven’t they helped the majority of the Board members get elected?

[Anonymous]

I would really love to hear from any individual who was on that "community panel."

It looks good on paper, but how meaningful were the opportunities to learn about and engage with the candidates? Do they have a sense that their feedback was received by the Board and integrated into their decision-making process?

The "Unable to Attend" asterisk does not inspire confidence. Unable to attend what? A 2-hour zoom? What are we talking about, exactly?

And if the SEAC chairs were "unable to attend," was their input solicited -- and received -- in some other way? If not -- why not?

I'm kind of imagining a back-to-school-night-style zoom with each candidate giving a 10-minute presentation, then Q&A from the chat, and each group -- what -- filling out some google form with feedback within 24 hours?

Or something superficial and lame like that.

Tell me I'm wrong. I would really like to be wrong about this. genuinely.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I would really love to hear from any individual who was on that "community panel."

It looks good on paper, but how meaningful were the opportunities to learn about and engage with the candidates? Do they have a sense that their feedback was received by the Board and integrated into their decision-making process?

The "Unable to Attend" asterisk does not inspire confidence. Unable to attend what? A 2-hour zoom? What are we talking about, exactly?

And if the SEAC chairs were "unable to attend," was their input solicited -- and received -- in some other way? If not -- why not?

I'm kind of imagining a back-to-school-night-style zoom with each candidate giving a 10-minute presentation, then Q&A from the chat, and each group -- what -- filling out some google form with feedback within 24 hours?

Or something superficial and lame like that.

Tell me I'm wrong. I would really like to be wrong about this. genuinely.

The board doesn't care about the community panel and it was all for show. I sat on on one with for our school and while we got to see each of the candidates it was shocking how bad two of them were and no where near qualified. Another one would have been ok but clueless about the community of the school. None, but the acting, even seemed to look at the school website or do any research into the school at all.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's gonna be Dr. McKnight. I can't imagine the BoE completely neutering her the final 4 1/2 months of her interim contract.

MCEA has no confidence in her. The Administrators Union wrote a scathing letter about her, but the incompetent BoE will turn their collective heads and hire her anyway.

Thank God I'm retiring!

I am floored that with the lack of planning for COVID, the chaotic return after winter break, one student murdered, one student shot in a school bathroom, a loaded gun found in another school, numerous fights, and combine those events with two unions casting a vote of no confidence, the BOE is going to give McKnight the permanent job??? The talent pool must have been real slim pickings.

Ugh.

The open at any cost was set by Smith, not McKnight. I'm not sure what she could have done about the violence when Smith took out the SRO's. We'll have to see what she chooses to do now. I am not a fan and would have preferred someone else but someone else just posted she is bring back the SRO's but calling them something different. Maybe she was just following Smith's agenda and to give her the benefit of the doubt since we are stuck with her, maybe she'll make some positive changes.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I would really love to hear from any individual who was on that "community panel."

It looks good on paper, but how meaningful were the opportunities to learn about and engage with the candidates? Do they have a sense that their feedback was received by the Board and integrated into their decision-making process?

The "Unable to Attend" asterisk does not inspire confidence. Unable to attend what? A 2-hour zoom? What are we talking about, exactly?

And if the SEAC chairs were "unable to attend," was their input solicited -- and received -- in some other way? If not -- why not?

I'm kind of imagining a back-to-school-night-style zoom with each candidate giving a 10-minute presentation, then Q&A from the chat, and each group -- what -- filling out some google form with feedback within 24 hours?

Or something superficial and lame like that.

Tell me I'm wrong. I would really like to be wrong about this. genuinely.

The board doesn't care about the community panel and it was all for show. I sat on on one with for our school and while we got to see each of the candidates it was shocking how bad two of them were and no where near qualified. Another one would have been ok but clueless about the community of the school. None, but the acting, even seemed to look at the school website or do any research into the school at all.

That tells me that the other candidates were for show, more than that the community panels were...

Was this in fact like some sort of 2-hour Zoom?
Did you have an opportunity to provide feedback to the BOE? What was that like?

Thanks for sharing your responses, I really appreciate it!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I will tell who is running the schools and it is the principals. Principals get minimal from central office AT BEST! We have kept schools running with limited communication, directions, goals, and direction. Also, policies change literally in 10 minutes sometimes, and we have had to constantly be on unplanned calls to make amends to messages we need to send out, and calls and announcements to family when things do not arrive in a timely manner as promised (masks and tests). It has been VERY exhausting and I know many principals throwing in the towel. Don't believe me? Go to MCPS jobs and look at how many principals are looking to leave. If you are happy with your child's school, thank the principal. If you went to 10 MCPS schools, you will notice the very noticeable variants from school to school. No school has a uniform message, plan, and structure.

This is true. Principals have been very unhappy with central office

Agreed. Mcps treats principals like garbage

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's gonna be Dr. McKnight. I can't imagine the BoE completely neutering her the final 4 1/2 months of her interim contract.

MCEA has no confidence in her. The Administrators Union wrote a scathing letter about her, but the incompetent BoE will turn their collective heads and hire her anyway.

Thank God I'm retiring!

I am floored that with the lack of planning for COVID, the chaotic return after winter break, one student murdered, one student shot in a school bathroom, a loaded gun found in another school, numerous fights, and combine those events with two unions casting a vote of no confidence, the BOE is going to give McKnight the permanent job??? The talent pool must have been real slim pickings.

Ugh.

The open at any cost was set by Smith, not McKnight. I'm not sure what she could have done about the violence when Smith took out the SRO's. We'll have to see what she chooses to do now. I am not a fan and would have preferred someone else but someone else just posted she is bring back the SRO's but calling them something different. Maybe she was just following Smith's agenda and to give her the benefit of the doubt since we are stuck with her, maybe she'll make some positive changes.

It would behoove McKnight and bolster her reputation if her boosters stopped coming in here to blatantly lie.

I do wonder how long they can carry on this game of blaming others for her missteps.