SSFS Will Stay Open

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Well, I for one am going to finger point. Sure, these things don't happen over night but I'm absolutely calling out RG and the current BOT as suspects in the failings of this school. I'm sure there are others.

I have long grown weary of parents who act like they are in the know just because they have more communication with RG, SG, and the BOT than the rest of us do. If you're so tight with these folks and feel the suspicions around them are unjust, then enlighten us with your knowledge or call on those folks to set the record straight.

Sounds like it doesn't matter what anyone tells you if it doesn't align with what you think.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Okay I hope I don’t get shut down for being a troll or man-splainer, but these are just a few reasons why I hesitate to re enroll.

1. We still know NOTHING of how the school got here. Why did RG get fired/quit? Why did the CFO get fired? Why did CL quit? How do the finances get this bad and BOT didn’t know? I am no more understanding why any of this happened now as a year ago and I’ve been asking these questions the whole time
2. The same BoT that hired RG, promoted CL, hired SG (none of whom really worked out for the school) hired SH. Why should I think he is any better a leader? Because the BOT says he is? What track record would prove to me that the school has found an effective leader hired by the same ppl with a disastrous track record in everything they have done?
3. The coalition seems to be made of a group of (well meaning) people who want to save the school they went to TWENTY FIVE YEARS AGO. This is NOT the ssfs of today. They are nostalgic about the school they loved (clearly not involved enough to have donated millions to the schools bottom line before this) and want to save their memories version of the school. But that does not mean they have my child’s best interest as a goal. This is why enticing ppl to reenroll is important to them and so uncovering the truth no more helps their cause as it did the BOTs and why we have learned nothing more through them then from the board! Their goal is to convince people to stay not to ensure my child will get a good education. So our goals don’t align so I don’t really trust what they’re selling either.

And then add to that the uncertainty of which teachers will stay (and why should they after being thrown under the bus cause we get them ice cream trucks?), can the school stay open long term, will programs drop- on the balance sheet for my family I have a much longer list on the con side.

Because you, as you said yourself, don't know anything about what really happened in the case of the CFO, RG, CL, or even the details of the hires of SG and SH, you need to be careful about your language and the assumptions that anyone was fired, shouldn't have been hired, or did something that played the key part in the position the school is in. What we know is that the school has had long term financial issues, predating all of these people and maybe even going back to the earliest days of the school. I'm not disagreeing with your points about wanting and needing more information. I'm saying the finger pointing at individuals is not needed.

Not the OP but defending the OP. The OP is raising questions that I for one also have. I don't see finger pointing. But if you're concerned about finger pointing then join us in calling for answers because answers to our questions is the best way to ward off finger pointing.

The questions are natural ones. I totally understand why those questions are there. I am saying that until there are clear answers not based on gossip or assumption, where people are involved, it would be most Quakerly not to frame them in a way that suggests blame or actual wrong-doing. See the Light in everyone and their efforts, and see the complications of a long-term situation.

Well, neither is it Quakery to spend a ton of money that you don't actually have. Nor is it Quakery to run a school into the ground. So, guess not-Quakery is a theme here.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Okay I hope I don’t get shut down for being a troll or man-splainer, but these are just a few reasons why I hesitate to re enroll.

1. We still know NOTHING of how the school got here. Why did RG get fired/quit? Why did the CFO get fired? Why did CL quit? How do the finances get this bad and BOT didn’t know? I am no more understanding why any of this happened now as a year ago and I’ve been asking these questions the whole time
2. The same BoT that hired RG, promoted CL, hired SG (none of whom really worked out for the school) hired SH. Why should I think he is any better a leader? Because the BOT says he is? What track record would prove to me that the school has found an effective leader hired by the same ppl with a disastrous track record in everything they have done?
3. The coalition seems to be made of a group of (well meaning) people who want to save the school they went to TWENTY FIVE YEARS AGO. This is NOT the ssfs of today. They are nostalgic about the school they loved (clearly not involved enough to have donated millions to the schools bottom line before this) and want to save their memories version of the school. But that does not mean they have my child’s best interest as a goal. This is why enticing ppl to reenroll is important to them and so uncovering the truth no more helps their cause as it did the BOTs and why we have learned nothing more through them then from the board! Their goal is to convince people to stay not to ensure my child will get a good education. So our goals don’t align so I don’t really trust what they’re selling either.

And then add to that the uncertainty of which teachers will stay (and why should they after being thrown under the bus cause we get them ice cream trucks?), can the school stay open long term, will programs drop- on the balance sheet for my family I have a much longer list on the con side.

Because you, as you said yourself, don't know anything about what really happened in the case of the CFO, RG, CL, or even the details of the hires of SG and SH, you need to be careful about your language and the assumptions that anyone was fired, shouldn't have been hired, or did something that played the key part in the position the school is in. What we know is that the school has had long term financial issues, predating all of these people and maybe even going back to the earliest days of the school. I'm not disagreeing with your points about wanting and needing more information. I'm saying the finger pointing at individuals is not needed.

Not the OP but defending the OP. The OP is raising questions that I for one also have. I don't see finger pointing. But if you're concerned about finger pointing then join us in calling for answers because answers to our questions is the best way to ward off finger pointing.

The questions are natural ones. I totally understand why those questions are there. I am saying that until there are clear answers not based on gossip or assumption, where people are involved, it would be most Quakerly not to frame them in a way that suggests blame or actual wrong-doing. See the Light in everyone and their efforts, and see the complications of a long-term situation.

Well, neither is it Quakery to spend a ton of money that you don't actually have. Nor is it Quakery to run a school into the ground. So, guess not-Quakery is a theme here.

People talk about the school as if it is some moral utopia and that the community is one of the kindest and most upright. I'm having trouble seeing that from the way the community acts online.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Okay I hope I don’t get shut down for being a troll or man-splainer, but these are just a few reasons why I hesitate to re enroll.

1. We still know NOTHING of how the school got here. Why did RG get fired/quit? Why did the CFO get fired? Why did CL quit? How do the finances get this bad and BOT didn’t know? I am no more understanding why any of this happened now as a year ago and I’ve been asking these questions the whole time
2. The same BoT that hired RG, promoted CL, hired SG (none of whom really worked out for the school) hired SH. Why should I think he is any better a leader? Because the BOT says he is? What track record would prove to me that the school has found an effective leader hired by the same ppl with a disastrous track record in everything they have done?
3. The coalition seems to be made of a group of (well meaning) people who want to save the school they went to TWENTY FIVE YEARS AGO. This is NOT the ssfs of today. They are nostalgic about the school they loved (clearly not involved enough to have donated millions to the schools bottom line before this) and want to save their memories version of the school. But that does not mean they have my child’s best interest as a goal. This is why enticing ppl to reenroll is important to them and so uncovering the truth no more helps their cause as it did the BOTs and why we have learned nothing more through them then from the board! Their goal is to convince people to stay not to ensure my child will get a good education. So our goals don’t align so I don’t really trust what they’re selling either.

And then add to that the uncertainty of which teachers will stay (and why should they after being thrown under the bus cause we get them ice cream trucks?), can the school stay open long term, will programs drop- on the balance sheet for my family I have a much longer list on the con side.

Because you, as you said yourself, don't know anything about what really happened in the case of the CFO, RG, CL, or even the details of the hires of SG and SH, you need to be careful about your language and the assumptions that anyone was fired, shouldn't have been hired, or did something that played the key part in the position the school is in. What we know is that the school has had long term financial issues, predating all of these people and maybe even going back to the earliest days of the school. I'm not disagreeing with your points about wanting and needing more information. I'm saying the finger pointing at individuals is not needed.

Not the OP but defending the OP. The OP is raising questions that I for one also have. I don't see finger pointing. But if you're concerned about finger pointing then join us in calling for answers because answers to our questions is the best way to ward off finger pointing.

The questions are natural ones. I totally understand why those questions are there. I am saying that until there are clear answers not based on gossip or assumption, where people are involved, it would be most Quakerly not to frame them in a way that suggests blame or actual wrong-doing. See the Light in everyone and their efforts, and see the complications of a long-term situation.

Well, neither is it Quakery to spend a ton of money that you don't actually have. Nor is it Quakery to run a school into the ground. So, guess not-Quakery is a theme here.

People talk about the school as if it is some moral utopia and that the community is one of the kindest and most upright. I'm having trouble seeing that from the way the community acts online.

Maybe the information you're getting this way is valuable even if it's hard to hear.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Okay I hope I don’t get shut down for being a troll or man-splainer, but these are just a few reasons why I hesitate to re enroll.

1. We still know NOTHING of how the school got here. Why did RG get fired/quit? Why did the CFO get fired? Why did CL quit? How do the finances get this bad and BOT didn’t know? I am no more understanding why any of this happened now as a year ago and I’ve been asking these questions the whole time
2. The same BoT that hired RG, promoted CL, hired SG (none of whom really worked out for the school) hired SH. Why should I think he is any better a leader? Because the BOT says he is? What track record would prove to me that the school has found an effective leader hired by the same ppl with a disastrous track record in everything they have done?
3. The coalition seems to be made of a group of (well meaning) people who want to save the school they went to TWENTY FIVE YEARS AGO. This is NOT the ssfs of today. They are nostalgic about the school they loved (clearly not involved enough to have donated millions to the schools bottom line before this) and want to save their memories version of the school. But that does not mean they have my child’s best interest as a goal. This is why enticing ppl to reenroll is important to them and so uncovering the truth no more helps their cause as it did the BOTs and why we have learned nothing more through them then from the board! Their goal is to convince people to stay not to ensure my child will get a good education. So our goals don’t align so I don’t really trust what they’re selling either.

And then add to that the uncertainty of which teachers will stay (and why should they after being thrown under the bus cause we get them ice cream trucks?), can the school stay open long term, will programs drop- on the balance sheet for my family I have a much longer list on the con side.

Because you, as you said yourself, don't know anything about what really happened in the case of the CFO, RG, CL, or even the details of the hires of SG and SH, you need to be careful about your language and the assumptions that anyone was fired, shouldn't have been hired, or did something that played the key part in the position the school is in. What we know is that the school has had long term financial issues, predating all of these people and maybe even going back to the earliest days of the school. I'm not disagreeing with your points about wanting and needing more information. I'm saying the finger pointing at individuals is not needed.

Not the OP but defending the OP. The OP is raising questions that I for one also have. I don't see finger pointing. But if you're concerned about finger pointing then join us in calling for answers because answers to our questions is the best way to ward off finger pointing.

The questions are natural ones. I totally understand why those questions are there. I am saying that until there are clear answers not based on gossip or assumption, where people are involved, it would be most Quakerly not to frame them in a way that suggests blame or actual wrong-doing. See the Light in everyone and their efforts, and see the complications of a long-term situation.

Well, neither is it Quakery to spend a ton of money that you don't actually have. Nor is it Quakery to run a school into the ground. So, guess not-Quakery is a theme here.

People talk about the school as if it is some moral utopia and that the community is one of the kindest and most upright. I'm having trouble seeing that from the way the community acts online.

Let's hope no community is judged by how posters (some of whom aren't even members of the community) act online - especially on DCUM.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Okay I hope I don’t get shut down for being a troll or man-splainer, but these are just a few reasons why I hesitate to re enroll.

1. We still know NOTHING of how the school got here. Why did RG get fired/quit? Why did the CFO get fired? Why did CL quit? How do the finances get this bad and BOT didn’t know? I am no more understanding why any of this happened now as a year ago and I’ve been asking these questions the whole time
2. The same BoT that hired RG, promoted CL, hired SG (none of whom really worked out for the school) hired SH. Why should I think he is any better a leader? Because the BOT says he is? What track record would prove to me that the school has found an effective leader hired by the same ppl with a disastrous track record in everything they have done?
3. The coalition seems to be made of a group of (well meaning) people who want to save the school they went to TWENTY FIVE YEARS AGO. This is NOT the ssfs of today. They are nostalgic about the school they loved (clearly not involved enough to have donated millions to the schools bottom line before this) and want to save their memories version of the school. But that does not mean they have my child’s best interest as a goal. This is why enticing ppl to reenroll is important to them and so uncovering the truth no more helps their cause as it did the BOTs and why we have learned nothing more through them then from the board! Their goal is to convince people to stay not to ensure my child will get a good education. So our goals don’t align so I don’t really trust what they’re selling either.

And then add to that the uncertainty of which teachers will stay (and why should they after being thrown under the bus cause we get them ice cream trucks?), can the school stay open long term, will programs drop- on the balance sheet for my family I have a much longer list on the con side.

Because you, as you said yourself, don't know anything about what really happened in the case of the CFO, RG, CL, or even the details of the hires of SG and SH, you need to be careful about your language and the assumptions that anyone was fired, shouldn't have been hired, or did something that played the key part in the position the school is in. What we know is that the school has had long term financial issues, predating all of these people and maybe even going back to the earliest days of the school. I'm not disagreeing with your points about wanting and needing more information. I'm saying the finger pointing at individuals is not needed.

Not the OP but defending the OP. The OP is raising questions that I for one also have. I don't see finger pointing. But if you're concerned about finger pointing then join us in calling for answers because answers to our questions is the best way to ward off finger pointing.

The questions are natural ones. I totally understand why those questions are there. I am saying that until there are clear answers not based on gossip or assumption, where people are involved, it would be most Quakerly not to frame them in a way that suggests blame or actual wrong-doing. See the Light in everyone and their efforts, and see the complications of a long-term situation.

Well, neither is it Quakery to spend a ton of money that you don't actually have. Nor is it Quakery to run a school into the ground. So, guess not-Quakery is a theme here.

People talk about the school as if it is some moral utopia and that the community is one of the kindest and most upright. I'm having trouble seeing that from the way the community acts online.

Maybe the information you're getting this way is valuable even if it's hard to hear.

Gaslighting. A lot of the information here is biased gossip, and some of it from people who are not even in the community who are trying to stir things.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Well, I for one am going to finger point. Sure, these things don't happen over night but I'm absolutely calling out RG and the current BOT as suspects in the failings of this school. I'm sure there are others.

I have long grown weary of parents who act like they are in the know just because they have more communication with RG, SG, and the BOT than the rest of us do. If you're so tight with these folks and feel the suspicions around them are unjust, then enlighten us with your knowledge or call on those folks to set the record straight.

Sounds like it doesn't matter what anyone tells you if it doesn't align with what you think.

How'd you deduce that? The poster is calling out the lack of information.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Okay I hope I don’t get shut down for being a troll or man-splainer, but these are just a few reasons why I hesitate to re enroll.

1. We still know NOTHING of how the school got here. Why did RG get fired/quit? Why did the CFO get fired? Why did CL quit? How do the finances get this bad and BOT didn’t know? I am no more understanding why any of this happened now as a year ago and I’ve been asking these questions the whole time
2. The same BoT that hired RG, promoted CL, hired SG (none of whom really worked out for the school) hired SH. Why should I think he is any better a leader? Because the BOT says he is? What track record would prove to me that the school has found an effective leader hired by the same ppl with a disastrous track record in everything they have done?
3. The coalition seems to be made of a group of (well meaning) people who want to save the school they went to TWENTY FIVE YEARS AGO. This is NOT the ssfs of today. They are nostalgic about the school they loved (clearly not involved enough to have donated millions to the schools bottom line before this) and want to save their memories version of the school. But that does not mean they have my child’s best interest as a goal. This is why enticing ppl to reenroll is important to them and so uncovering the truth no more helps their cause as it did the BOTs and why we have learned nothing more through them then from the board! Their goal is to convince people to stay not to ensure my child will get a good education. So our goals don’t align so I don’t really trust what they’re selling either.

And then add to that the uncertainty of which teachers will stay (and why should they after being thrown under the bus cause we get them ice cream trucks?), can the school stay open long term, will programs drop- on the balance sheet for my family I have a much longer list on the con side.

Because you, as you said yourself, don't know anything about what really happened in the case of the CFO, RG, CL, or even the details of the hires of SG and SH, you need to be careful about your language and the assumptions that anyone was fired, shouldn't have been hired, or did something that played the key part in the position the school is in. What we know is that the school has had long term financial issues, predating all of these people and maybe even going back to the earliest days of the school. I'm not disagreeing with your points about wanting and needing more information. I'm saying the finger pointing at individuals is not needed.

Not the OP but defending the OP. The OP is raising questions that I for one also have. I don't see finger pointing. But if you're concerned about finger pointing then join us in calling for answers because answers to our questions is the best way to ward off finger pointing.

The questions are natural ones. I totally understand why those questions are there. I am saying that until there are clear answers not based on gossip or assumption, where people are involved, it would be most Quakerly not to frame them in a way that suggests blame or actual wrong-doing. See the Light in everyone and their efforts, and see the complications of a long-term situation.

Well, neither is it Quakery to spend a ton of money that you don't actually have. Nor is it Quakery to run a school into the ground. So, guess not-Quakery is a theme here.

People talk about the school as if it is some moral utopia and that the community is one of the kindest and most upright. I'm having trouble seeing that from the way the community acts online.

Maybe the information you're getting this way is valuable even if it's hard to hear.

Gaslighting. A lot of the information here is biased gossip, and some of it from people who are not even in the community who are trying to stir things.

+1000 Yep! There's been a lot of online pot stirrers on here all year across various SSFS forums.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Okay I hope I don’t get shut down for being a troll or man-splainer, but these are just a few reasons why I hesitate to re enroll.

1. We still know NOTHING of how the school got here. Why did RG get fired/quit? Why did the CFO get fired? Why did CL quit? How do the finances get this bad and BOT didn’t know? I am no more understanding why any of this happened now as a year ago and I’ve been asking these questions the whole time
2. The same BoT that hired RG, promoted CL, hired SG (none of whom really worked out for the school) hired SH. Why should I think he is any better a leader? Because the BOT says he is? What track record would prove to me that the school has found an effective leader hired by the same ppl with a disastrous track record in everything they have done?
3. The coalition seems to be made of a group of (well meaning) people who want to save the school they went to TWENTY FIVE YEARS AGO. This is NOT the ssfs of today. They are nostalgic about the school they loved (clearly not involved enough to have donated millions to the schools bottom line before this) and want to save their memories version of the school. But that does not mean they have my child’s best interest as a goal. This is why enticing ppl to reenroll is important to them and so uncovering the truth no more helps their cause as it did the BOTs and why we have learned nothing more through them then from the board! Their goal is to convince people to stay not to ensure my child will get a good education. So our goals don’t align so I don’t really trust what they’re selling either.

And then add to that the uncertainty of which teachers will stay (and why should they after being thrown under the bus cause we get them ice cream trucks?), can the school stay open long term, will programs drop- on the balance sheet for my family I have a much longer list on the con side.

Because you, as you said yourself, don't know anything about what really happened in the case of the CFO, RG, CL, or even the details of the hires of SG and SH, you need to be careful about your language and the assumptions that anyone was fired, shouldn't have been hired, or did something that played the key part in the position the school is in. What we know is that the school has had long term financial issues, predating all of these people and maybe even going back to the earliest days of the school. I'm not disagreeing with your points about wanting and needing more information. I'm saying the finger pointing at individuals is not needed.

Not the OP but defending the OP. The OP is raising questions that I for one also have. I don't see finger pointing. But if you're concerned about finger pointing then join us in calling for answers because answers to our questions is the best way to ward off finger pointing.

The questions are natural ones. I totally understand why those questions are there. I am saying that until there are clear answers not based on gossip or assumption, where people are involved, it would be most Quakerly not to frame them in a way that suggests blame or actual wrong-doing. See the Light in everyone and their efforts, and see the complications of a long-term situation.

When are those "clear answers" coming? I suspect it will be a week from never.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Well, I for one am going to finger point. Sure, these things don't happen over night but I'm absolutely calling out RG and the current BOT as suspects in the failings of this school. I'm sure there are others.

I have long grown weary of parents who act like they are in the know just because they have more communication with RG, SG, and the BOT than the rest of us do. If you're so tight with these folks and feel the suspicions around them are unjust, then enlighten us with your knowledge or call on those folks to set the record straight.

Sounds like it doesn't matter what anyone tells you if it doesn't align with what you think.

That could be said about a lot of people at that school.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Okay I hope I don’t get shut down for being a troll or man-splainer, but these are just a few reasons why I hesitate to re enroll.

1. We still know NOTHING of how the school got here. Why did RG get fired/quit? Why did the CFO get fired? Why did CL quit? How do the finances get this bad and BOT didn’t know? I am no more understanding why any of this happened now as a year ago and I’ve been asking these questions the whole time
2. The same BoT that hired RG, promoted CL, hired SG (none of whom really worked out for the school) hired SH. Why should I think he is any better a leader? Because the BOT says he is? What track record would prove to me that the school has found an effective leader hired by the same ppl with a disastrous track record in everything they have done?
3. The coalition seems to be made of a group of (well meaning) people who want to save the school they went to TWENTY FIVE YEARS AGO. This is NOT the ssfs of today. They are nostalgic about the school they loved (clearly not involved enough to have donated millions to the schools bottom line before this) and want to save their memories version of the school. But that does not mean they have my child’s best interest as a goal. This is why enticing ppl to reenroll is important to them and so uncovering the truth no more helps their cause as it did the BOTs and why we have learned nothing more through them then from the board! Their goal is to convince people to stay not to ensure my child will get a good education. So our goals don’t align so I don’t really trust what they’re selling either.

And then add to that the uncertainty of which teachers will stay (and why should they after being thrown under the bus cause we get them ice cream trucks?), can the school stay open long term, will programs drop- on the balance sheet for my family I have a much longer list on the con side.

Because you, as you said yourself, don't know anything about what really happened in the case of the CFO, RG, CL, or even the details of the hires of SG and SH, you need to be careful about your language and the assumptions that anyone was fired, shouldn't have been hired, or did something that played the key part in the position the school is in. What we know is that the school has had long term financial issues, predating all of these people and maybe even going back to the earliest days of the school. I'm not disagreeing with your points about wanting and needing more information. I'm saying the finger pointing at individuals is not needed.

Not the OP but defending the OP. The OP is raising questions that I for one also have. I don't see finger pointing. But if you're concerned about finger pointing then join us in calling for answers because answers to our questions is the best way to ward off finger pointing.

The questions are natural ones. I totally understand why those questions are there. I am saying that until there are clear answers not based on gossip or assumption, where people are involved, it would be most Quakerly not to frame them in a way that suggests blame or actual wrong-doing. See the Light in everyone and their efforts, and see the complications of a long-term situation.

Well, neither is it Quakery to spend a ton of money that you don't actually have. Nor is it Quakery to run a school into the ground. So, guess not-Quakery is a theme here.

This school hasnt been Quakerly for some years. Isn't that why they've been losing business?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Okay I hope I don’t get shut down for being a troll or man-splainer, but these are just a few reasons why I hesitate to re enroll.

1. We still know NOTHING of how the school got here. Why did RG get fired/quit? Why did the CFO get fired? Why did CL quit? How do the finances get this bad and BOT didn’t know? I am no more understanding why any of this happened now as a year ago and I’ve been asking these questions the whole time
2. The same BoT that hired RG, promoted CL, hired SG (none of whom really worked out for the school) hired SH. Why should I think he is any better a leader? Because the BOT says he is? What track record would prove to me that the school has found an effective leader hired by the same ppl with a disastrous track record in everything they have done?
3. The coalition seems to be made of a group of (well meaning) people who want to save the school they went to TWENTY FIVE YEARS AGO. This is NOT the ssfs of today. They are nostalgic about the school they loved (clearly not involved enough to have donated millions to the schools bottom line before this) and want to save their memories version of the school. But that does not mean they have my child’s best interest as a goal. This is why enticing ppl to reenroll is important to them and so uncovering the truth no more helps their cause as it did the BOTs and why we have learned nothing more through them then from the board! Their goal is to convince people to stay not to ensure my child will get a good education. So our goals don’t align so I don’t really trust what they’re selling either.

And then add to that the uncertainty of which teachers will stay (and why should they after being thrown under the bus cause we get them ice cream trucks?), can the school stay open long term, will programs drop- on the balance sheet for my family I have a much longer list on the con side.

Because you, as you said yourself, don't know anything about what really happened in the case of the CFO, RG, CL, or even the details of the hires of SG and SH, you need to be careful about your language and the assumptions that anyone was fired, shouldn't have been hired, or did something that played the key part in the position the school is in. What we know is that the school has had long term financial issues, predating all of these people and maybe even going back to the earliest days of the school. I'm not disagreeing with your points about wanting and needing more information. I'm saying the finger pointing at individuals is not needed.

Not the OP but defending the OP. The OP is raising questions that I for one also have. I don't see finger pointing. But if you're concerned about finger pointing then join us in calling for answers because answers to our questions is the best way to ward off finger pointing.

The questions are natural ones. I totally understand why those questions are there. I am saying that until there are clear answers not based on gossip or assumption, where people are involved, it would be most Quakerly not to frame them in a way that suggests blame or actual wrong-doing. See the Light in everyone and their efforts, and see the complications of a long-term situation.

Well, neither is it Quakery to spend a ton of money that you don't actually have. Nor is it Quakery to run a school into the ground. So, guess not-Quakery is a theme here.

People talk about the school as if it is some moral utopia and that the community is one of the kindest and most upright. I'm having trouble seeing that from the way the community acts online.

Let's hope no community is judged by how posters (some of whom aren't even members of the community) act online - especially on DCUM.

I judge the community by the fact that enough people left to put it out of business. I doubt they all left because of what they read here.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I have a child who is re-enrolled at SSFS, and here's why: he went from being unable to drag himself out of bed to get to school at his prior school (and being absent a LOT in his final year) to being up and early every day he's been at SSFS. He has made connections with his peers and teachers that he didn't have at his earlier school. He's on track to graduate with excellent grades and a great sense of who he is and where he belongs in the world.

And I say all of that knowing full well that the school had and has serious management issues. My point is that those haven't impacted my child day to day. And I also want to be clear that his earlier school was great, just not a great fit for him, and finding that fit has been so important. I'm so grateful to the angel donor who has made my son being able to complete his senior year at SSFS possible, and I hope that admin and new board members are able to turn things around.

Ok but how does the high student and teacher attrition affect him?

PP who re-enrolled her rising senior. There is ALWAYS attrition at a school, and many of my son's friends are seniors who are graduating. Will the extra attrition affect him? Maybe, but again, in high school, a lot of times you don't have the same teachers year after year either (although there are some that he would love to have again). I don't anticipate so much attrition that it would cause the kind of school refusal we saw earlier in his life.

In terms of the school being different next year due to a smaller size, that's also obviously likely. There may be classes or activities that aren't run next year, and that will be annoying and maybe sad because it's his senior year, but ultimately, the pros of being at the school, with hopefully many of his classmates and at least some teachers, will be by FAR the better option for him than starting over at a new place. That is our family's decision, and I respect that others may have different options that work for them. It is a time of transition for the school, but that doesn't have to be a bad thing.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Okay I hope I don’t get shut down for being a troll or man-splainer, but these are just a few reasons why I hesitate to re enroll.

1. We still know NOTHING of how the school got here. Why did RG get fired/quit? Why did the CFO get fired? Why did CL quit? How do the finances get this bad and BOT didn’t know? I am no more understanding why any of this happened now as a year ago and I’ve been asking these questions the whole time
2. The same BoT that hired RG, promoted CL, hired SG (none of whom really worked out for the school) hired SH. Why should I think he is any better a leader? Because the BOT says he is? What track record would prove to me that the school has found an effective leader hired by the same ppl with a disastrous track record in everything they have done?
3. The coalition seems to be made of a group of (well meaning) people who want to save the school they went to TWENTY FIVE YEARS AGO. This is NOT the ssfs of today. They are nostalgic about the school they loved (clearly not involved enough to have donated millions to the schools bottom line before this) and want to save their memories version of the school. But that does not mean they have my child’s best interest as a goal. This is why enticing ppl to reenroll is important to them and so uncovering the truth no more helps their cause as it did the BOTs and why we have learned nothing more through them then from the board! Their goal is to convince people to stay not to ensure my child will get a good education. So our goals don’t align so I don’t really trust what they’re selling either.

And then add to that the uncertainty of which teachers will stay (and why should they after being thrown under the bus cause we get them ice cream trucks?), can the school stay open long term, will programs drop- on the balance sheet for my family I have a much longer list on the con side.

Because you, as you said yourself, don't know anything about what really happened in the case of the CFO, RG, CL, or even the details of the hires of SG and SH, you need to be careful about your language and the assumptions that anyone was fired, shouldn't have been hired, or did something that played the key part in the position the school is in. What we know is that the school has had long term financial issues, predating all of these people and maybe even going back to the earliest days of the school. I'm not disagreeing with your points about wanting and needing more information. I'm saying the finger pointing at individuals is not needed.

Not the OP but defending the OP. The OP is raising questions that I for one also have. I don't see finger pointing. But if you're concerned about finger pointing then join us in calling for answers because answers to our questions is the best way to ward off finger pointing.

The questions are natural ones. I totally understand why those questions are there. I am saying that until there are clear answers not based on gossip or assumption, where people are involved, it would be most Quakerly not to frame them in a way that suggests blame or actual wrong-doing. See the Light in everyone and their efforts, and see the complications of a long-term situation.

Well, neither is it Quakery to spend a ton of money that you don't actually have. Nor is it Quakery to run a school into the ground. So, guess not-Quakery is a theme here.

This school hasnt been Quakerly for some years. Isn't that why they've been losing business?

I think it's better to be Quakerly or to not be Quakerly, but very hard to do both. But there definitely are people who wanted Quaker-lite.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Well, I for one am going to finger point. Sure, these things don't happen over night but I'm absolutely calling out RG and the current BOT as suspects in the failings of this school. I'm sure there are others.

I have long grown weary of parents who act like they are in the know just because they have more communication with RG, SG, and the BOT than the rest of us do. If you're so tight with these folks and feel the suspicions around them are unjust, then enlighten us with your knowledge or call on those folks to set the record straight.

Sounds like it doesn't matter what anyone tells you if it doesn't align with what you think.

How'd you deduce that? The poster is calling out the lack of information.

The poster is making a lot of assumptions given a lack of information, and said that they are "weary of parents who act like they are in the know just because they have more communication with RG, SG, and the BOT than the rest of us do." If you don't have information but don't want to listen to those who have more communication, then...