Shake Up at SSMA?

[Anonymous]

This is sad and so stressful for families.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

SSMA is fully 20 points away from Tier 1. And the testing grades are getting larger, so PARCC will be factored in as well.

Do the math:

24.4 out of 55 = 44.4%

That's the score for SSMA from last year http://www.dcpcsb.org/sites/default/files/2017-11-8%20PMF%20Score%20Card%20SY16-17_Shining%20Stars%20Montessori%20Academy%20PCS_2017.pdf

SSMA scored a combined 0.9 out of 18 on the re-enrollment and attendance scores. If SSMA HAD scored 18 out of 18 by hitting a 95% attendance and 90% re-enrollment, it would have scored 18 out of 18, that's an extra 17.1 points

24.1 + 17.1 = 41.5 out of 55 or 75%.

To get to the 65% Tier 1 cutoff, SSMA has to score 35.75 out of 55. Effectively that means all SSMA has to do is score 12.45 out of 18 on re-enrollment and attendance and it is Tier 1.

That is VERY doable

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

SSMA is fully 20 points away from Tier 1. And the testing grades are getting larger, so PARCC will be factored in as well.

One more thing. The ONLY tests that matter for Tiering at SSMA is PARCC. So when you say "PARCC will be factored in as well", it already IS factored in. In fact, it's the only academic factor for Tiering. The other tests on the PMF don't factor for Tiering, not at SSMA, not at ANY DC PCS. It's ALL about PARCC

Look at Bridges http://www.dcpcsb.org/sites/default/files/2017-11-8%20PMF%20Score%20Card%20SY16-17_Bridges%20PCS_2017.pdf

Look at Roots http://www.dcpcsb.org/sites/default/files/2017-11-8%20PMF%20Score%20Card%20SY16-17_Roots%20PCS_2017.pdf

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Well, management is a skill and not everyone has it. The ED is basically MIA in the school's day to day operations. Basically no parent involvement at all. The guides are so great and my DC is doing so well there. Seems like the ED has to go. How would that happen? The complaints about the board are they are a rubber stamp so are they really going to step up here? The teachers need support and all the comments about a culture of fear are so disheartening.

I also feel like the managment layers are so unnecessary and wasteful. I can't believe there is a post for an assistant principal now. Too many hands...

What do you mean no parent involvement? There is the SSMACA (PTA) that is very involved and has raised thousands of dollars for the school. I do think the parents have been too trusting with the ED and Board. There have been numerous red flags that should have resulted in action--20 pt drop on PMF, staff turnover, etc.

Yes, I agree. The parents are VERY involved at SSMA. But parents do need to step up at tomorrow's board meeting now that we know what's happening behind the scenes. Guides will leave if the ED stays on and that's going to hurt re-enrollment.

I have been doing some research and I found interesting stuff on the DC PCS Board website.

First is the PMF you mentioned http://www.dcpcsb.org/sites/default/files/2017-11-8%20PMF%20Score%20Card%20SY16-17_Shining%20Stars%20Montessori%20Academy%20PCS_2017.pdf

What I noticed is that SSMA doesn't rank on all of the criteria and has a score based only on 55 out of a total 100 points. If you look at Bridges, for example, they rank on the full 100 point scale http://www.dcpcsb.org/sites/default/files/2017-11-8%20PMF%20Score%20Card%20SY16-17_Bridges%20PCS_2017.pdf

Where SSMA got killed last year vs the previous year was on attendance and re-enrollment. We lost 17 out of 18 points on those two factors alone. On the academic side of the PMF, all the PARCC scores were the same or went up versus the previous year http://www.dcpcsb.org/sites/default/files/Shining%20Stars%20Montessori%20Academy%20PCS_EC_PK3-8_2016.pdf

If we can get attendance and re-enrollment up, we would actually be a Tier 1 school with a score of 41.5 out of 55 or 75% instead of 24.4 out of 55. That's way above the cutoff for Tier 1. So it's not the academics, which have improved with the new director. It's attendance and re-enrollment.

To me, that makes this board issue critical because we NEED re-enrollment.

The second thing is the Annual Report:

http://www.dcpcsb.org/report/annual-report/shining-stars-montessori-academy-pcs-annual-report

What I noticed when I went through it is that the woman listed as Operations Manager is now listed on SSMA's website as Director of Compliance & School Performance. And she only has a high school diploma. Plus she's only been at the school 6 months. So, it's not like she was promoted to director because of her unique institutional knowledge. Not to be snobby, but this concerns me. To me, this looks like someone who is getting promoted not based on merit, but on allegiance to the ED. All of the other admin/directors listed in this Annual Report have advanced degrees.

Someone wrote about a "climate of fear". How about a climate of cronyism?

Anyway, SSMA is really close to Tier 1. If we can get rid of the toxic environment, we can fix the attendance and re-enrollment issues and we will instantly be a Tier 1 school.

That's a lot of "ifs". When you can't get parents to get kids to school on time, there is no sense of respect for school. It's not a daycare center and that's how some of them treat it. You have to simply un-enroll them and move on. Check the PMF for K-2 Reading..what in the world is that? Instructional support is the real problem area. It is virtually non-existent and linked directly to horrible staffing. Our lower el experience was simply phenomenal. But this past year in Upper El has been just say "less than stellar." That's where all the lack of leadership and planning manifests itself. Meetings with the ED and former principal were a waste of time--no clue what to do! I fully expect the PARCC scores to be flat out awful. I don't really agree to with all the PARCC\MAP testing but I do recognize it's importance in placement.

Be very snobby and down right anal! The school needs more parents like that to survive. This may be the last straw unless radical changes are made. At the core, independent charter schools are a business. No way a business can survive like this. The problems won't be fixed anytime soon. I'd recommend looking at other options. We knew in November we couldn't continue and had to scramble to come up with a plan. The lower el experience had us fooled.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

SSMA is fully 20 points away from Tier 1. And the testing grades are getting larger, so PARCC will be factored in as well.

One more thing. The ONLY tests that matter for Tiering at SSMA is PARCC. So when you say "PARCC will be factored in as well", it already IS factored in. In fact, it's the only academic factor for Tiering. The other tests on the PMF don't factor for Tiering, not at SSMA, not at ANY DC PCS. It's ALL about PARCC

Look at Bridges http://www.dcpcsb.org/sites/default/files/2017-11-8%20PMF%20Score%20Card%20SY16-17_Bridges%20PCS_2017.pdf

Look at Roots http://www.dcpcsb.org/sites/default/files/2017-11-8%20PMF%20Score%20Card%20SY16-17_Roots%20PCS_2017.pdf

Yes but SSMA DIDN"T have 2 years PARCC scores to report for the 2017; they will for the next one.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
That's a lot of "ifs". When you can't get parents to get kids to school on time, there is no sense of respect for school. It's not a daycare center and that's how some of them treat it. You have to simply un-enroll them and move on. Check the PMF for K-2 Reading..what in the world is that? Instructional support is the real problem area. It is virtually non-existent and linked directly to horrible staffing. Our lower el experience was simply phenomenal. But this past year in Upper El has been just say "less than stellar." That's where all the lack of leadership and planning manifests itself. Meetings with the ED and former principal were a waste of time--no clue what to do! I fully expect the PARCC scores to be flat out awful. I don't really agree to with all the PARCC\MAP testing but I do recognize it's importance in placement.

Be very snobby and down right anal! The school needs more parents like that to survive. This may be the last straw unless radical changes are made. At the core, independent charter schools are a business. No way a business can survive like this. The problems won't be fixed anytime soon. I'd recommend looking at other options. We knew in November we couldn't continue and had to scramble to come up with a plan. The lower el experience had us fooled.

Bottom Line: The ED expanded way too quickly. SSMA needs to walk before it runs

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

SSMA is fully 20 points away from Tier 1. And the testing grades are getting larger, so PARCC will be factored in as well.

One more thing. The ONLY tests that matter for Tiering at SSMA is PARCC. So when you say "PARCC will be factored in as well", it already IS factored in. In fact, it's the only academic factor for Tiering. The other tests on the PMF don't factor for Tiering, not at SSMA, not at ANY DC PCS. It's ALL about PARCC

Look at Bridges http://www.dcpcsb.org/sites/default/files/2017-11-8%20PMF%20Score%20Card%20SY16-17_Bridges%20PCS_2017.pdf

Look at Roots http://www.dcpcsb.org/sites/default/files/2017-11-8%20PMF%20Score%20Card%20SY16-17_Roots%20PCS_2017.pdf

Yes but SSMA DIDN"T have 2 years PARCC scores to report for the 2017; they will for the next one.

It did.

Here's year one: http://www.dcpcsb.org/sites/default/files/Shining%20Stars%20Montessori%20Academy%20PCS_EC_PK3-8_2016.pdf
And here's year 2: http://www.dcpcsb.org/sites/default/files/2017-11-8%20PMF%20Score%20Card%20SY16-17_Shining%20Stars%20Montessori%20Academy%20PCS_2017.pdf

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
That's a lot of "ifs". When you can't get parents to get kids to school on time, there is no sense of respect for school. It's not a daycare center and that's how some of them treat it. You have to simply un-enroll them and move on. Check the PMF for K-2 Reading..what in the world is that? Instructional support is the real problem area. It is virtually non-existent and linked directly to horrible staffing. Our lower el experience was simply phenomenal. But this past year in Upper El has been just say "less than stellar." That's where all the lack of leadership and planning manifests itself. Meetings with the ED and former principal were a waste of time--no clue what to do! I fully expect the PARCC scores to be flat out awful. I don't really agree to with all the PARCC\MAP testing but I do recognize it's importance in placement.

Be very snobby and down right anal! The school needs more parents like that to survive. This may be the last straw unless radical changes are made. At the core, independent charter schools are a business. No way a business can survive like this. The problems won't be fixed anytime soon. I'd recommend looking at other options. We knew in November we couldn't continue and had to scramble to come up with a plan. The lower el experience had us fooled.

I'm expecting awful PARCC scores too. My DC told me there was no air conditioning on the day of the PARCC tests. And I know for a fact it was over 90 degrees in DC that day. Talk about poor planning. Who's in charge of facilities?

[Anonymous]

I am a terrible person, because I am looking at this thread and thinking that I hope it chases away other prospective SSMA parents. We're on the waiting list w/ a maybe-but-probably-not number (although it would have been enough in 2 of the past 3 years by October) and, given our alternative, I would love LOVE LOVE to end up at SSMA.

[Anonymous]

I am a terrible person, because I am looking at this thread and thinking that I hope it chases away other prospective SSMA parents. We're on the waiting list w/ a maybe-but-probably-not number (although it would have been enough in 2 of the past 3 years by October) and, given our alternative, I would love LOVE LOVE to end up at SSMA.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I am a terrible person, because I am looking at this thread and thinking that I hope it chases away other prospective SSMA parents. We're on the waiting list w/ a maybe-but-probably-not number (although it would have been enough in 2 of the past 3 years by October) and, given our alternative, I would love LOVE LOVE to end up at SSMA.

In a similar boat with the waitlist, although this thread is sort of worrying me because I'd like to end up at a school where we can stay long term. And this is NOT making me feel like this school would be a great long-term plan. Mind sharing your waitlist number? Purely curious how ours fares. Also, what numbers are you looking at to determine if "enough in 2 of the past 3 years by October?"

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Has anyone seen this job posting on Indeed?

https://www.indeed.com/company/Education-Talent-Recruiters/jobs/Montessori-Elementary-School-Principal-e10875423b75af45?fccid=0aecfacb292e62d2&vjs=3

It's from "Education Talent Recruiters" which I Googled and couldn't find anywhere on the Internet. I think it's an advertisement for the SSMA job. It sounds like the way SSMA phrases stuff. But it's UNBELIEVABLY long... to the point of being bonkers.

And notice it was posted 14 days ago, which is May 3rd, 6 days before the departing principal's last day. I guarantee you the SSMA ED wrote this job posting.

Crazy stuff, really.

That has got to be SSMA. All that for $75k, good luck!

It definitely is SSMA. See this SSMA job posting for the Principal from 2015 http://www.shiningstarspcs.org/images/pdf/career/principal_15.pdf

The same Education Talent Recruiters company is now advertising for Guide positions too using the same terms https://www.indeed.com/cmp/Education-Talent-Recruiters/jobs/Montessori-Lead-Guide-f23d71fbc81d357f?sjdu=QwrRXKrqZ3CNX5W-O9jEvQeryoiJaXlQSJ8TMgRxAZWbSXxRNghoZfu0yAhfrJIuU0wpLVkh0eycywzsFxp0yseZy3Xgf4LdIXbncJNvdNghkT4USyYBsfFZJZ98SahIvAXFwtOydFY9lCSgNQPVwQ&tk=1cdqa3794414rdua&vjs=3

Some of the phrases in the Guide job are identical to the 2015 Principal opening: "A passion for growing independent, confident and intellectually curious children" "A love of children and a sense of humor"

So some Guides might be getting fired too?

The Principal position also now says "This job posting is no longer available on Indeed." So maybe they found someone

Also notice the 2015 Principal opening: "A passion for growing independent, confident and intellectually curious children" has been replaced with "A demonstrated passion for advancing educational opportunities in low-income communities" in the now defunct 2018 position description.

That's a clear signal if you ask me

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Has anyone seen this job posting on Indeed?

https://www.indeed.com/company/Education-Talent-Recruiters/jobs/Montessori-Elementary-School-Principal-e10875423b75af45?fccid=0aecfacb292e62d2&vjs=3

It's from "Education Talent Recruiters" which I Googled and couldn't find anywhere on the Internet. I think it's an advertisement for the SSMA job. It sounds like the way SSMA phrases stuff. But it's UNBELIEVABLY long... to the point of being bonkers.

And notice it was posted 14 days ago, which is May 3rd, 6 days before the departing principal's last day. I guarantee you the SSMA ED wrote this job posting.

Crazy stuff, really.

That has got to be SSMA. All that for $75k, good luck!

It definitely is SSMA. See this SSMA job posting for the Principal from 2015 http://www.shiningstarspcs.org/images/pdf/career/principal_15.pdf

The same Education Talent Recruiters company is now advertising for Guide positions too using the same terms https://www.indeed.com/cmp/Education-Talent-Recruiters/jobs/Montessori-Lead-Guide-f23d71fbc81d357f?sjdu=QwrRXKrqZ3CNX5W-O9jEvQeryoiJaXlQSJ8TMgRxAZWbSXxRNghoZfu0yAhfrJIuU0wpLVkh0eycywzsFxp0yseZy3Xgf4LdIXbncJNvdNghkT4USyYBsfFZJZ98SahIvAXFwtOydFY9lCSgNQPVwQ&tk=1cdqa3794414rdua&vjs=3

Some of the phrases in the Guide job are identical to the 2015 Principal opening: "A passion for growing independent, confident and intellectually curious children" "A love of children and a sense of humor"

So some Guides might be getting fired too?

The Principal position also now says "This job posting is no longer available on Indeed." So maybe they found someone

Also notice the 2015 Principal opening: "A passion for growing independent, confident and intellectually curious children" has been replaced with "A demonstrated passion for advancing educational opportunities in low-income communities" in the now defunct 2018 position description.

That's a clear signal if you ask me

Remember they added all those primary classes - they have to add guides as those children age into elementary. No guides are necessarily being fired / leaving.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am a terrible person, because I am looking at this thread and thinking that I hope it chases away other prospective SSMA parents. We're on the waiting list w/ a maybe-but-probably-not number (although it would have been enough in 2 of the past 3 years by October) and, given our alternative, I would love LOVE LOVE to end up at SSMA.

In a similar boat with the waitlist, although this thread is sort of worrying me because I'd like to end up at a school where we can stay long term. And this is NOT making me feel like this school would be a great long-term plan. Mind sharing your waitlist number? Purely curious how ours fares. Also, what numbers are you looking at to determine if "enough in 2 of the past 3 years by October?"

There's a website where you can see how many waitlist offers were made by June, August and October in each of the previous 3 years. Now, obviously, people might come off the waitlist for reasons other than an offer being made, but if there were more offers made than the highest your waitlist number ever got, than you can safely assume that you would have gotten an offer. We are in the mid-40s for PK3 at SSMA.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Has anyone seen this job posting on Indeed?

https://www.indeed.com/company/Education-Talent-Recruiters/jobs/Montessori-Elementary-School-Principal-e10875423b75af45?fccid=0aecfacb292e62d2&vjs=3

It's from "Education Talent Recruiters" which I Googled and couldn't find anywhere on the Internet. I think it's an advertisement for the SSMA job. It sounds like the way SSMA phrases stuff. But it's UNBELIEVABLY long... to the point of being bonkers.

And notice it was posted 14 days ago, which is May 3rd, 6 days before the departing principal's last day. I guarantee you the SSMA ED wrote this job posting.

Crazy stuff, really.

That has got to be SSMA. All that for $75k, good luck!

It definitely is SSMA. See this SSMA job posting for the Principal from 2015 http://www.shiningstarspcs.org/images/pdf/career/principal_15.pdf

The same Education Talent Recruiters company is now advertising for Guide positions too using the same terms https://www.indeed.com/cmp/Education-Talent-Recruiters/jobs/Montessori-Lead-Guide-f23d71fbc81d357f?sjdu=QwrRXKrqZ3CNX5W-O9jEvQeryoiJaXlQSJ8TMgRxAZWbSXxRNghoZfu0yAhfrJIuU0wpLVkh0eycywzsFxp0yseZy3Xgf4LdIXbncJNvdNghkT4USyYBsfFZJZ98SahIvAXFwtOydFY9lCSgNQPVwQ&tk=1cdqa3794414rdua&vjs=3

Some of the phrases in the Guide job are identical to the 2015 Principal opening: "A passion for growing independent, confident and intellectually curious children" "A love of children and a sense of humor"

So some Guides might be getting fired too?

The Principal position also now says "This job posting is no longer available on Indeed." So maybe they found someone

Also notice the 2015 Principal opening: "A passion for growing independent, confident and intellectually curious children" has been replaced with "A demonstrated passion for advancing educational opportunities in low-income communities" in the now defunct 2018 position description.

That's a clear signal if you ask me

Basically, after hiring two white principals, she has decided she wants someone of color to be the principal. That's what this is all about.