LAMB Sued for $20M by 2 families of sexual abuse victims

[Anonymous]

It's absolutely reasonable to wonder both things, but it's really early days. It will take a year if not more to find out whether the new leadership/Board will impact the quality of the school.

We're new there this year, but from what I can tell, most of the staff and teachers are the same. It's the admin. leadership and Board that changed.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Or, it's maybe (just maybe) possible that different parents have different perspectives?

For some, this is a deal breaker (that it happened and the administration seemed afraid to deal with it head on).

For others, the schools' great track record with happy students and academic success makes it not a deal breaker.

Both perspectives actually seem quite sane to me without having to name call or eye roll others.

But it still would give me pause knowing the admin turned their backs on kids. While it may not happen again, the thoughts still linger.

It’s not the same admin.

Pretty much the entire top leadership has turned over including most of the board now.

What made the school so strong to begin with? Is there any worry that -- while complicit -- the board and administration also were part of the school's success? Or is it more the parent population driving that? Or Montessori approach? Truly just curious. We applied to but did not get into the school and are now happily settled elsewhere. And again, do not think there is a right or wrong answer when it comes to parents' choices ... it seems reasonable to believe this has been handled and the school is now a better place and it seems reasonable to worry still. I just wondered if the school lost so many staff that it's just entirely a different place now or not?

You raise the most salient point. The school community has been asking itself that throughout this process. Or, more pointedly, how to maintain the successful parts of the school while removing those who got it there, as well as changing the damaging aspects of the school culture. The top admin are gone or leaving, but the lower level staff is mainly still there including (most...not all...) teachers. I think the conclusion was, it is the teachers that are the most important to success. It does remain to be seen and as a new-ish family I've found it interesting to note that schools don't change quickly, they do seem to be made up of everyone involved and they each have their internal culture embedded. The part that needed to end was a kind of culture of secrecy based on top leadership. It seems that is slowly changing, plus new safety and other policies are being applied.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Or, it's maybe (just maybe) possible that different parents have different perspectives?

For some, this is a deal breaker (that it happened and the administration seemed afraid to deal with it head on).

For others, the schools' great track record with happy students and academic success makes it not a deal breaker.

Both perspectives actually seem quite sane to me without having to name call or eye roll others.

But it still would give me pause knowing the admin turned their backs on kids. While it may not happen again, the thoughts still linger.

It’s not the same admin.

Pretty much the entire top leadership has turned over including most of the board now.

Was the board kicked out? Or left on their own?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Or, it's maybe (just maybe) possible that different parents have different perspectives?

For some, this is a deal breaker (that it happened and the administration seemed afraid to deal with it head on).

For others, the schools' great track record with happy students and academic success makes it not a deal breaker.

Both perspectives actually seem quite sane to me without having to name call or eye roll others.

But it still would give me pause knowing the admin turned their backs on kids. While it may not happen again, the thoughts still linger.

It’s not the same admin.

Pretty much the entire top leadership has turned over including most of the board now.

What made the school so strong to begin with? Is there any worry that -- while complicit -- the board and administration also were part of the school's success? Or is it more the parent population driving that? Or Montessori approach? Truly just curious. We applied to but did not get into the school and are now happily settled elsewhere. And again, do not think there is a right or wrong answer when it comes to parents' choices ... it seems reasonable to believe this has been handled and the school is now a better place and it seems reasonable to worry still. I just wondered if the school lost so many staff that it's just entirely a different place now or not?

You raise the most salient point. The school community has been asking itself that throughout this process. Or, more pointedly, how to maintain the successful parts of the school while removing those who got it there, as well as changing the damaging aspects of the school culture. The top admin are gone or leaving, but the lower level staff is mainly still there including (most...not all...) teachers. I think the conclusion was, it is the teachers that are the most important to success. It does remain to be seen and as a new-ish family I've found it interesting to note that schools don't change quickly, they do seem to be made up of everyone involved and they each have their internal culture embedded. The part that needed to end was a kind of culture of secrecy based on top leadership. It seems that is slowly changing, plus new safety and other policies are being applied.

Original LAMB parent here - kids graduated a few years ago, although one did have Manolo for a year as their teacher.

The teachers were a huge part of what made the school work, but so too did the original admins. They set the tone, were willing to course correct, use data and deliver specialized (not necessarily Montessori materials based) reading and mathematics instruction to kids who needed it inside and outside of the classroom, either because the students had documented learning differences or were just struggling for unknown reasons.

The principal would tell you point blank that you a parent sending an email or calling with a question) were not the priority if she had a child in front of her who needed something. I think that is what hurt me the most as a parent who loved the school; that they really did drop the ball for a whole bunch of kids when their whole ethos had been about putting the school first.

There were always complaints about the admins most of which were repeated time and again on DCUM: that they were impervious to parent criticism and deep involvement, school-parent communications was weak, that they expanded too fast and took on too many facilities. Hiring for non-teaching positions and awarding of contracts seemed to be based on a network of people the admins knew; there was definitely an in-group and everyone else.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Or, it's maybe (just maybe) possible that different parents have different perspectives?

For some, this is a deal breaker (that it happened and the administration seemed afraid to deal with it head on).

For others, the schools' great track record with happy students and academic success makes it not a deal breaker.

Both perspectives actually seem quite sane to me without having to name call or eye roll others.

But it still would give me pause knowing the admin turned their backs on kids. While it may not happen again, the thoughts still linger.

It’s not the same admin.

Pretty much the entire top leadership has turned over including most of the board now.

Was the board kicked out? Or left on their own?

I'm not sure they could really be kicked out. They left on their own, not all at once, it's been a process, also needed to find replacements etc. Under a lot of pressure to do so by parents though.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Or, it's maybe (just maybe) possible that different parents have different perspectives?

For some, this is a deal breaker (that it happened and the administration seemed afraid to deal with it head on).

For others, the schools' great track record with happy students and academic success makes it not a deal breaker.

Both perspectives actually seem quite sane to me without having to name call or eye roll others.

But it still would give me pause knowing the admin turned their backs on kids. While it may not happen again, the thoughts still linger.

It’s not the same admin.

Pretty much the entire top leadership has turned over including most of the board now.

Was the board kicked out? Or left on their own?

I'm not sure they could really be kicked out. They left on their own, not all at once, it's been a process, also needed to find replacements etc. Under a lot of pressure to do so by parents though.

The chair is gone. More admins need to go. The teachers were always the best part of the school. 2/3 vice principals are new, but one of the ones kicked out is still there in another capacity (to the detriment of the school- she needs to go).

I liked the original principal too, but like most current lamb parents, I stopped trusting her once I understood what happened.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Or, it's maybe (just maybe) possible that different parents have different perspectives?

For some, this is a deal breaker (that it happened and the administration seemed afraid to deal with it head on).

For others, the schools' great track record with happy students and academic success makes it not a deal breaker.

Both perspectives actually seem quite sane to me without having to name call or eye roll others.

But it still would give me pause knowing the admin turned their backs on kids. While it may not happen again, the thoughts still linger.

It’s not the same admin.

Pretty much the entire top leadership has turned over including most of the board now.

Was the board kicked out? Or left on their own?

I'm not sure they could really be kicked out. They left on their own, not all at once, it's been a process, also needed to find replacements etc. Under a lot of pressure to do so by parents though.

May also have been under significant pressure from LAMB's insurer, which is defending the institution in the civil lawsuits.

And frankly, if you had been on the LAMB board, wouldn't you want out?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Or, it's maybe (just maybe) possible that different parents have different perspectives?

For some, this is a deal breaker (that it happened and the administration seemed afraid to deal with it head on).

For others, the schools' great track record with happy students and academic success makes it not a deal breaker.

Both perspectives actually seem quite sane to me without having to name call or eye roll others.

But it still would give me pause knowing the admin turned their backs on kids. While it may not happen again, the thoughts still linger.

It’s not the same admin.

Pretty much the entire top leadership has turned over including most of the board now.

Was the board kicked out? Or left on their own?

I'm not sure they could really be kicked out. They left on their own, not all at once, it's been a process, also needed to find replacements etc. Under a lot of pressure to do so by parents though.

May also have been under significant pressure from LAMB's insurer, which is defending the institution in the civil lawsuits.

And frankly, if you had been on the LAMB board, wouldn't you want out?

Yes I would, that is why I was surprised some of them stayed so long.

Of course, any time you have to start afresh with all new leadership there will be some bumps. I truly hope that the school hires a very good principal and ED. It does seem that these two positions have a huge impact on each school and in the case of charters, are only removed with extreme difficulty.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Or, it's maybe (just maybe) possible that different parents have different perspectives?

For some, this is a deal breaker (that it happened and the administration seemed afraid to deal with it head on).

For others, the schools' great track record with happy students and academic success makes it not a deal breaker.

Both perspectives actually seem quite sane to me without having to name call or eye roll others.

But it still would give me pause knowing the admin turned their backs on kids. While it may not happen again, the thoughts still linger.

It’s not the same admin.

Pretty much the entire top leadership has turned over including most of the board now.

What made the school so strong to begin with? Is there any worry that -- while complicit -- the board and administration also were part of the school's success? Or is it more the parent population driving that? Or Montessori approach? Truly just curious. We applied to but did not get into the school and are now happily settled elsewhere. And again, do not think there is a right or wrong answer when it comes to parents' choices ... it seems reasonable to believe this has been handled and the school is now a better place and it seems reasonable to worry still. I just wondered if the school lost so many staff that it's just entirely a different place now or not?

You raise the most salient point. The school community has been asking itself that throughout this process. Or, more pointedly, how to maintain the successful parts of the school while removing those who got it there, as well as changing the damaging aspects of the school culture. The top admin are gone or leaving, but the lower level staff is mainly still there including (most...not all...) teachers. I think the conclusion was, it is the teachers that are the most important to success. It does remain to be seen and as a new-ish family I've found it interesting to note that schools don't change quickly, they do seem to be made up of everyone involved and they each have their internal culture embedded. The part that needed to end was a kind of culture of secrecy based on top leadership. It seems that is slowly changing, plus new safety and other policies are being applied.

Original LAMB parent here - kids graduated a few years ago, although one did have Manolo for a year as their teacher.

The teachers were a huge part of what made the school work, but so too did the original admins. They set the tone, were willing to course correct, use data and deliver specialized (not necessarily Montessori materials based) reading and mathematics instruction to kids who needed it inside and outside of the classroom, either because the students had documented learning differences or were just struggling for unknown reasons.

The principal would tell you point blank that you a parent sending an email or calling with a question) were not the priority if she had a child in front of her who needed something. I think that is what hurt me the most as a parent who loved the school; that they really did drop the ball for a whole bunch of kids when their whole ethos had been about putting the school first.

There were always complaints about the admins most of which were repeated time and again on DCUM: that they were impervious to parent criticism and deep involvement, school-parent communications was weak, that they expanded too fast and took on too many facilities. Hiring for non-teaching positions and awarding of contracts seemed to be based on a network of people the admins knew; there was definitely an in-group and everyone else.

The bolded part above is what I wonder about with the new admins at LAMB. I hated the old admins, and feel sick to my stomach thinking about what happened as a result of their negligence. But I do wonder if their ability to use data and deliver specialized instruction to all of the kids who needed it was a large part of their success. We negotiated an IEP for our special needs child the year before the old admins left. The administration was incredibly supportive of the needs of our child and went out of their way to make sure there were enough special education hours to serve her. From what I read on the Special Needs board, this is fairly unusual for a school to do. It is yet to be seen if the new admins are willing and ready to expend significant effort to serve all kids, whatever their family background and whatever their individual learning needs. So far so good, but I think it is a bit too soon to tell.

I do think that Montessori methodology is more accepting of individual learning styles than other schools. At its best, this means that Montessori schools accommodate differences and support the kids who need extra help. At its worst, this can mean that problems are glossed over as differences in individual development from kid to kid.

The old admins were also pretty good at balancing classes (language, behavioral aspects) and at moving weaker/newer teachers into pairings with strong/experienced teachers so that the weaker teachers could improve and classes were served well overall. Again, too soon to tell for the new admins(?).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Or, it's maybe (just maybe) possible that different parents have different perspectives?

For some, this is a deal breaker (that it happened and the administration seemed afraid to deal with it head on).

For others, the schools' great track record with happy students and academic success makes it not a deal breaker.

Both perspectives actually seem quite sane to me without having to name call or eye roll others.

But it still would give me pause knowing the admin turned their backs on kids. While it may not happen again, the thoughts still linger.

It’s not the same admin.

Pretty much the entire top leadership has turned over including most of the board now.

What made the school so strong to begin with? Is there any worry that -- while complicit -- the board and administration also were part of the school's success? Or is it more the parent population driving that? Or Montessori approach? Truly just curious. We applied to but did not get into the school and are now happily settled elsewhere. And again, do not think there is a right or wrong answer when it comes to parents' choices ... it seems reasonable to believe this has been handled and the school is now a better place and it seems reasonable to worry still. I just wondered if the school lost so many staff that it's just entirely a different place now or not?

You raise the most salient point. The school community has been asking itself that throughout this process. Or, more pointedly, how to maintain the successful parts of the school while removing those who got it there, as well as changing the damaging aspects of the school culture. The top admin are gone or leaving, but the lower level staff is mainly still there including (most...not all...) teachers. I think the conclusion was, it is the teachers that are the most important to success. It does remain to be seen and as a new-ish family I've found it interesting to note that schools don't change quickly, they do seem to be made up of everyone involved and they each have their internal culture embedded. The part that needed to end was a kind of culture of secrecy based on top leadership. It seems that is slowly changing, plus new safety and other policies are being applied.

Original LAMB parent here - kids graduated a few years ago, although one did have Manolo for a year as their teacher.

The teachers were a huge part of what made the school work, but so too did the original admins. They set the tone, were willing to course correct, use data and deliver specialized (not necessarily Montessori materials based) reading and mathematics instruction to kids who needed it inside and outside of the classroom, either because the students had documented learning differences or were just struggling for unknown reasons.

The principal would tell you point blank that you a parent sending an email or calling with a question) were not the priority if she had a child in front of her who needed something. I think that is what hurt me the most as a parent who loved the school; that they really did drop the ball for a whole bunch of kids when their whole ethos had been about putting the school first.

There were always complaints about the admins most of which were repeated time and again on DCUM: that they were impervious to parent criticism and deep involvement, school-parent communications was weak, that they expanded too fast and took on too many facilities. Hiring for non-teaching positions and awarding of contracts seemed to be based on a network of people the admins knew; there was definitely an in-group and everyone else.

The bolded part above is what I wonder about with the new admins at LAMB. I hated the old admins, and feel sick to my stomach thinking about what happened as a result of their negligence. But I do wonder if their ability to use data and deliver specialized instruction to all of the kids who needed it was a large part of their success. We negotiated an IEP for our special needs child the year before the old admins left. The administration was incredibly supportive of the needs of our child and went out of their way to make sure there were enough special education hours to serve her. From what I read on the Special Needs board, this is fairly unusual for a school to do. It is yet to be seen if the new admins are willing and ready to expend significant effort to serve all kids, whatever their family background and whatever their individual learning needs. So far so good, but I think it is a bit too soon to tell.

I do think that Montessori methodology is more accepting of individual learning styles than other schools. At its best, this means that Montessori schools accommodate differences and support the kids who need extra help. At its worst, this can mean that problems are glossed over as differences in individual development from kid to kid.

The old admins were also pretty good at balancing classes (language, behavioral aspects) and at moving weaker/newer teachers into pairings with strong/experienced teachers so that the weaker teachers could improve and classes were served well overall. Again, too soon to tell for the new admins(?).

I am really wondering this too. Our teacher left along with a number of them this year so I can't really rely on reputation around the new one to inspire confidence, nor do I really know how to tell whether they're good because Montessori is harder to judge I feel. I agree that either kids get a lot of individualized support, or, they can also just be ignored.

However - new admins aren't yet in place. What we have now are temporary admins. This may be something a candidate should be asked about. I also do not know how teachers are measured (weaker vs stronger)?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Or, it's maybe (just maybe) possible that different parents have different perspectives?

For some, this is a deal breaker (that it happened and the administration seemed afraid to deal with it head on).

For others, the schools' great track record with happy students and academic success makes it not a deal breaker.

Both perspectives actually seem quite sane to me without having to name call or eye roll others.

But it still would give me pause knowing the admin turned their backs on kids. While it may not happen again, the thoughts still linger.

It’s not the same admin.

Pretty much the entire top leadership has turned over including most of the board now.

What made the school so strong to begin with? Is there any worry that -- while complicit -- the board and administration also were part of the school's success? Or is it more the parent population driving that? Or Montessori approach? Truly just curious. We applied to but did not get into the school and are now happily settled elsewhere. And again, do not think there is a right or wrong answer when it comes to parents' choices ... it seems reasonable to believe this has been handled and the school is now a better place and it seems reasonable to worry still. I just wondered if the school lost so many staff that it's just entirely a different place now or not?

You raise the most salient point. The school community has been asking itself that throughout this process. Or, more pointedly, how to maintain the successful parts of the school while removing those who got it there, as well as changing the damaging aspects of the school culture. The top admin are gone or leaving, but the lower level staff is mainly still there including (most...not all...) teachers. I think the conclusion was, it is the teachers that are the most important to success. It does remain to be seen and as a new-ish family I've found it interesting to note that schools don't change quickly, they do seem to be made up of everyone involved and they each have their internal culture embedded. The part that needed to end was a kind of culture of secrecy based on top leadership. It seems that is slowly changing, plus new safety and other policies are being applied.

Original LAMB parent here - kids graduated a few years ago, although one did have Manolo for a year as their teacher.

The teachers were a huge part of what made the school work, but so too did the original admins. They set the tone, were willing to course correct, use data and deliver specialized (not necessarily Montessori materials based) reading and mathematics instruction to kids who needed it inside and outside of the classroom, either because the students had documented learning differences or were just struggling for unknown reasons.

The principal would tell you point blank that you a parent sending an email or calling with a question) were not the priority if she had a child in front of her who needed something. I think that is what hurt me the most as a parent who loved the school; that they really did drop the ball for a whole bunch of kids when their whole ethos had been about putting the school first.

There were always complaints about the admins most of which were repeated time and again on DCUM: that they were impervious to parent criticism and deep involvement, school-parent communications was weak, that they expanded too fast and took on too many facilities. Hiring for non-teaching positions and awarding of contracts seemed to be based on a network of people the admins knew; there was definitely an in-group and everyone else.

The bolded part above is what I wonder about with the new admins at LAMB. I hated the old admins, and feel sick to my stomach thinking about what happened as a result of their negligence. But I do wonder if their ability to use data and deliver specialized instruction to all of the kids who needed it was a large part of their success. We negotiated an IEP for our special needs child the year before the old admins left. The administration was incredibly supportive of the needs of our child and went out of their way to make sure there were enough special education hours to serve her. From what I read on the Special Needs board, this is fairly unusual for a school to do. It is yet to be seen if the new admins are willing and ready to expend significant effort to serve all kids, whatever their family background and whatever their individual learning needs. So far so good, but I think it is a bit too soon to tell.

I do think that Montessori methodology is more accepting of individual learning styles than other schools. At its best, this means that Montessori schools accommodate differences and support the kids who need extra help. At its worst, this can mean that problems are glossed over as differences in individual development from kid to kid.

The old admins were also pretty good at balancing classes (language, behavioral aspects) and at moving weaker/newer teachers into pairings with strong/experienced teachers so that the weaker teachers could improve and classes were served well overall. Again, too soon to tell for the new admins(?).

This was my experience at a Montessori school. It can be scary to watch your kid flounder and be told everything is fine.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Or, it's maybe (just maybe) possible that different parents have different perspectives?

For some, this is a deal breaker (that it happened and the administration seemed afraid to deal with it head on).

For others, the schools' great track record with happy students and academic success makes it not a deal breaker.

Both perspectives actually seem quite sane to me without having to name call or eye roll others.

But it still would give me pause knowing the admin turned their backs on kids. While it may not happen again, the thoughts still linger.

It’s not the same admin.

Pretty much the entire top leadership has turned over including most of the board now.

What made the school so strong to begin with? Is there any worry that -- while complicit -- the board and administration also were part of the school's success? Or is it more the parent population driving that? Or Montessori approach? Truly just curious. We applied to but did not get into the school and are now happily settled elsewhere. And again, do not think there is a right or wrong answer when it comes to parents' choices ... it seems reasonable to believe this has been handled and the school is now a better place and it seems reasonable to worry still. I just wondered if the school lost so many staff that it's just entirely a different place now or not?

You raise the most salient point. The school community has been asking itself that throughout this process. Or, more pointedly, how to maintain the successful parts of the school while removing those who got it there, as well as changing the damaging aspects of the school culture. The top admin are gone or leaving, but the lower level staff is mainly still there including (most...not all...) teachers. I think the conclusion was, it is the teachers that are the most important to success. It does remain to be seen and as a new-ish family I've found it interesting to note that schools don't change quickly, they do seem to be made up of everyone involved and they each have their internal culture embedded. The part that needed to end was a kind of culture of secrecy based on top leadership. It seems that is slowly changing, plus new safety and other policies are being applied.

Original LAMB parent here - kids graduated a few years ago, although one did have Manolo for a year as their teacher.

The teachers were a huge part of what made the school work, but so too did the original admins. They set the tone, were willing to course correct, use data and deliver specialized (not necessarily Montessori materials based) reading and mathematics instruction to kids who needed it inside and outside of the classroom, either because the students had documented learning differences or were just struggling for unknown reasons.

The principal would tell you point blank that you a parent sending an email or calling with a question) were not the priority if she had a child in front of her who needed something. I think that is what hurt me the most as a parent who loved the school; that they really did drop the ball for a whole bunch of kids when their whole ethos had been about putting the school first.

There were always complaints about the admins most of which were repeated time and again on DCUM: that they were impervious to parent criticism and deep involvement, school-parent communications was weak, that they expanded too fast and took on too many facilities. Hiring for non-teaching positions and awarding of contracts seemed to be based on a network of people the admins knew; there was definitely an in-group and everyone else.

The bolded part above is what I wonder about with the new admins at LAMB. I hated the old admins, and feel sick to my stomach thinking about what happened as a result of their negligence. But I do wonder if their ability to use data and deliver specialized instruction to all of the kids who needed it was a large part of their success. We negotiated an IEP for our special needs child the year before the old admins left. The administration was incredibly supportive of the needs of our child and went out of their way to make sure there were enough special education hours to serve her. From what I read on the Special Needs board, this is fairly unusual for a school to do. It is yet to be seen if the new admins are willing and ready to expend significant effort to serve all kids, whatever their family background and whatever their individual learning needs. So far so good, but I think it is a bit too soon to tell.

I do think that Montessori methodology is more accepting of individual learning styles than other schools. At its best, this means that Montessori schools accommodate differences and support the kids who need extra help. At its worst, this can mean that problems are glossed over as differences in individual development from kid to kid.

The old admins were also pretty good at balancing classes (language, behavioral aspects) and at moving weaker/newer teachers into pairings with strong/experienced teachers so that the weaker teachers could improve and classes were served well overall. Again, too soon to tell for the new admins(?).

This was my experience at a Montessori school. It can be scary to watch your kid flounder and be told everything is fine.

How did you know they were floundering?

[Anonymous]

Another lawsuit was filed last week

[Anonymous]

Didn’t the major lawsuit settle?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Didn’t the major lawsuit settle?

Yes it did. What is this one?