Forum Index
»
Private & Independent Schools
Turnover @ Lowell???
![[Post New]](/jforum/templates/default/images/icon_minipost_new.gif){kind=icon}
Anonymous
Is the situation serious enough to lose an entire year's tuition? |
Anonymous
| a fabulous K teacher in my kid's current school has just told me she'll be teaching at Lowell next year. Her geographic plans were unclear earlier this year when she needed to commit to a new contract at current school, so she did not renew. Any child is lucky to have this teacher for K. Since were anonymous, I'm not going to say where she's coming from. . . . . |
Anonymous
|
PP, I am glad to hear that you have had a good experience with one of the new K teachers.
A couple of corrections/thoughts on what people have said. To the PP who says that there are too many "special needs kids" I would really like to hear (and am sure Debbie would like to hear) about this problem that you see. It is my experience that there are no "special needs" kids as I understand that term in any of their classes. Of course there are always some kids who are more work/trouble than others especially at the very early grades but there are not kids with major problems there (when those serious issues arise those kids are counseled out). Indeed, it would be pretty impressive if Lowell both had large numbers of special needs kids as the previous poster (inaccurately in my view suggests) and then has most of their students go on to "Big whatever" schools as is discussed in the other threads. I hope if you have really had such severe issues that you have consulted with the school in some detail with respect to the problems you have experienced. The list of "teacher turnover" at 14 is overstated somewhat because for example the restructuring of the PE/Aquatics program affected some staff members but not true "teachers" in any meaningful way, nor is the tech person (the IT guy) really a teacher. |
Anonymous
|
A few comments:
A, the tech person WAS a real person. His job description belied what he did. He taught computers to the children. He was a teacher. Second, PP does not counsel kids out with issue. Barring a safety issue, they don't consider doing it until kindergarten. It is an unofficial policy. Three, while not necessarily diagnosed with special needs, there is an overly high demand on teachers throughout the school. The learning specialists are stretched beyond their means and teachers cannot meet the needs of all their students and, unfortunately, the kids in the middle (the non-squeaky wheels) are the ones left out in the cold. Lowell embraces diversity, including of learning styles, in a wonderful way. But they are ill-equipped to handle all of the types of learners they bring in. Furthermore, as enrollment has dropped, admission standards have dropped, to the point that very few kids were outright rejected. On and on the cycle goes. I am close friends with a Lowell teacher and fellow teacher myself. This is what has been relayed to me. I realize that this level of anonymity will call what I've said into question, but I respect this teacher's privacy. This teacher is working to address these issues behind the scenes but cannot publicly discuss them for fear of losing his/her job. But these issues are real. They are not unique to Lowell, but are particularly acute there and have led to a lot of the recent movement of teachers. |
Anonymous
| 12:05 - seriously, your post is disingenuous. When the Tech teacher was hired and teaching at the school, he was a fabulous teacher. Now, he was an "IT Guy?" This is offensive to the parents who were paying for their students to have the benefits of this "Guy" while he was on staff and the administration was singing his praises. And to dismiss the departure of the Aquatics teachers as though they are not teachers is offensive to all the many parents whose kids learned to swim under the direction of those non-teachers and is unhelpful to the school ultimately because you are suggesting that for years, parents were paying for the aquatics program and filling up the aquatics classes for non-teachers. While I get the fact that you are trying to minimize the effect of the number of departures listed by a previous poster, this is an inappropriate and frankly silly way to make that point. I don't think your post is helping the perception of Lowell and I am a Lowell parent who is concerned about the attrition, but who quite appreciated the talents the non-teachers brought to the school and to my kids' lives. |
Anonymous
| 21:52 here again - and before you flame me, despite my concerns, I am hopeful that things will settle down at the school and I am very encouraged by the many positive changes I am seeing at the school. I do think these are growing pains and the things going well do in fact outweigh the attrition issues (particularly if they sort themselves out this year). |
Anonymous
|
PP-
Great point. Before his departure, the academic technologist (his title at the time) was being praised for all he did. Now that he's leaving for another local school, he's "just the IT guy". Can't have it both ways. I understand that the change was made to the PE/aquatics program and it made sense to shift personnel. But do not discount what the previous aquatics instructor brought to the table. A lot of family's were attracted to Lowell because of him, both as a teacher and as a strong African-American male role model. A lot is lost with his departure, even if there were benefits as a result of the change as well. Look, Lowell is working through some tough times. All schools will at some point. There is nothing wrong with critically examining and analyzing why this might be happening and what it means in the broader picture. If the attitude is "Goodbye and good riddance" to these teachers, than shouldn't the question be why were 14+ disposable teachers employed in the first place? If Lowell prides itself on stellar faculty, why would any departures be viewed in a positive light? Surely, there will be people who can and should be replaced... but in these numbers? It is completely disingenous to act as if such a large group of teachers can so easily be replaced, especially because some of these teachers were specifically held up as integral to the Lowell program. Within this departing group, you are losing 3 males, an administrator, 3 teachers of color, a teacher who designed a new program (JK), a top administrator, an entire teaching team, 2/3 of another teaching team, the person responsible for building and rebuilding the athletics department/program, the first technology teacher the school has seen, and much, much more. To dismiss these as no big deal is to ignore a problem staring you in the face. At your own peril. Will Lowell survive this? I hope so and think so. Most of us have too much invested in the school to stand idly by. But, the turnover situation at present time IS rightfully concerning and pretending it is not will do nothing to serve the underlying problems that are driving it. |
Anonymous
Different Lowell parent here...they have already hired three men, an administrator, 3 teachers of color and filled all the other open positions with interesting, qualified and diverse people. We have already established that of the 14 teachers that are leaving, at least half left for reasons that have nothing to do with dissatisfaction. I would be much more concerned if they were having trouble attracting such candidates. Why don't we give Lowell the benefit of the doubt that at least some of the turnover is normal (and since the new teachers come from Norwood, DCPS charters, et. al. this must be the case) and look forward to what Lowell can do with such strong new teachers coming in. |
Anonymous
| I don't know if all you posters are real but if I was intereted in Lowell I would no longer be. Get together at a local Starbucks or library or at the school! and talk about your fears. I would never pay $20+ thousand on a school with parents like yourselves who have to hide behind anonymous posts to vent and express fear. That's just sad. I hope for the school's sake all the posts are written by non-Lowell parents trying to passively dismiss the school (again). |
Anonymous
I was the original PP. If this information is true about the replacements (and I don't have reason to believe it's not... I just wasn't informed of all the specifics of the new hires), then that certainly bodes well. That being said, it is wrong for Lowell to downplay the impact of these departures, especially after celebrating some of these teachers/individuals. Don't sing the praises of the first tech teacher and then dismiss him as "just" an IT guy. It's dishonest. Maybe Lowell's turnover is not such a big deal. But given the sheer number, and the patterns that have emerged over the past few years, I think the questions are fair. Information like what you've shared is very useful to the conversation. Thank you. |
Anonymous
|
Turnover is not unheard of, but these numbers are very high. Of course qualified staff can be brought in, but there is a lot to be said for experience and commitment.
If teacher's feel unappreciated and defeated, it all comes from the top. Lowell administration needs to take a close look at what they value and what they expect from their staff. |
Anonymous
| @10:50 Dead on! Former Lowell teacher here. |
Anonymous
| @18:07 Ditto!!! |
Anonymous
| Same as the last two... |
Anonymous
| Current teacher-hoping to be former soon-in complete agreement with previous 3. |