DCI Parent Petition

Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:If you read the full letter and have ever worked under similar leadership, whether in a public or corporate setting, you’ll understand exactly what it’s describing. The fact that more than 100 teachers have left since the ED started speaks for itself.


The teacher retention issue, is the main issue. It doesn't matter if the school is offering the most advanced and most comprehensive list of IB courses and adding APs etc. if staff aren't there to provide high quality instruction and support students. I guess for kids that can walk themselves through curriculum online it's okay but good teachers that stay are what will make it a really good middle/high school. No idea if this ED is good for that or not.


DCI's teacher retention on the school report card is 73% - which is just about the charter average. While it's not great, has there been a decline over the recent years? Or has retention always been an issue (even before this particular ED and/or the union)? I am always surprised that in unionized charter environments pay and retention seem to be lower than in non-unionized ones. Not saying it's a union issue but wondering if the factors that cause staff to move in the direction of unionizing are entrenched and complex.


That’s an interesting question. I do think that you are right, there’s a lot going on. That said, several of the unions are relatively new and it can take a looooooong time to ratify a contract, and I believe things sort of freeze while that is under way in terms of comp, so that could be another contributing factor for some of the newer unions.


School report card is outdated. That is from 2 years ago? The rate was presented at the last board meeting in the 90’s.


Not sure how long ago it was but most of the retention metrics cover teachers who worked at a school in 24-25 and returned for 25-26. So not two years old. Interesting that the letter that goes with the petition suggests very high turnover (but doesn’t provide actual figures), yet the recent retention rate you quoted is 90%. If that is correct, retention is better not worse.


The letter does provide actual figures and you'd know that if you read it: "Due to the culture of micromanagement and fear he has fostered, many
qualified, dedicated staff who have served DCI’s community for years are leaving: over 125 departures since SY23-24"


That’s 3 years ago and it’s not specific for teachers. What is the breakdown of teachers? Majority could be low level staff like aids, facilities, etc..…. What is the total staff at the school - this could mean 10% a year or 40% a year.

If you are going to provide numbers then it needs to be in what context and details. It’s generalizations and stuff like this that when you look at the letter critically, it needs more substance to support.

Generalizations such as this


Need you to complete your sentences Pardo in order to respond. But you already know this detail.

Regardless, it’s a damning number no matter how you cut the data.
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:If you read the full letter and have ever worked under similar leadership, whether in a public or corporate setting, you’ll understand exactly what it’s describing. The fact that more than 100 teachers have left since the ED started speaks for itself.


The teacher retention issue, is the main issue. It doesn't matter if the school is offering the most advanced and most comprehensive list of IB courses and adding APs etc. if staff aren't there to provide high quality instruction and support students. I guess for kids that can walk themselves through curriculum online it's okay but good teachers that stay are what will make it a really good middle/high school. No idea if this ED is good for that or not.


DCI's teacher retention on the school report card is 73% - which is just about the charter average. While it's not great, has there been a decline over the recent years? Or has retention always been an issue (even before this particular ED and/or the union)? I am always surprised that in unionized charter environments pay and retention seem to be lower than in non-unionized ones. Not saying it's a union issue but wondering if the factors that cause staff to move in the direction of unionizing are entrenched and complex.


That’s an interesting question. I do think that you are right, there’s a lot going on. That said, several of the unions are relatively new and it can take a looooooong time to ratify a contract, and I believe things sort of freeze while that is under way in terms of comp, so that could be another contributing factor for some of the newer unions.


School report card is outdated. That is from 2 years ago? The rate was presented at the last board meeting in the 90’s.


Not sure how long ago it was but most of the retention metrics cover teachers who worked at a school in 24-25 and returned for 25-26. So not two years old. Interesting that the letter that goes with the petition suggests very high turnover (but doesn’t provide actual figures), yet the recent retention rate you quoted is 90%. If that is correct, retention is better not worse.


The letter does provide actual figures and you'd know that if you read it: "Due to the culture of micromanagement and fear he has fostered, many
qualified, dedicated staff who have served DCI’s community for years are leaving: over 125 departures since SY23-24"


That’s 3 years ago and it’s not specific for teachers. What is the breakdown of teachers? Majority could be low level staff like aids, facilities, etc..…. What is the total staff at the school - this could mean 10% a year or 40% a year.

If you are going to provide numbers then it needs to be in what context and details. It’s generalizations and stuff like this that when you look at the letter critically, it needs more substance to support.

Generalizations such as this


Need you to complete your sentences Pardo in order to respond. But you already know this detail.

Regardless, it’s a damning number no matter how you cut the data.


Sorry but I’m not Pardo whoever that is. Just a DCI parent who is trying to give you some constructive criticism that throwing out numbers with no context or details is not helpful.

If you have 500 staff members for instance and you lose 40 staff a year, that is just 8% turnover and no those numbers are not damning.
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:If you read the full letter and have ever worked under similar leadership, whether in a public or corporate setting, you’ll understand exactly what it’s describing. The fact that more than 100 teachers have left since the ED started speaks for itself.


The teacher retention issue, is the main issue. It doesn't matter if the school is offering the most advanced and most comprehensive list of IB courses and adding APs etc. if staff aren't there to provide high quality instruction and support students. I guess for kids that can walk themselves through curriculum online it's okay but good teachers that stay are what will make it a really good middle/high school. No idea if this ED is good for that or not.


DCI's teacher retention on the school report card is 73% - which is just about the charter average. While it's not great, has there been a decline over the recent years? Or has retention always been an issue (even before this particular ED and/or the union)? I am always surprised that in unionized charter environments pay and retention seem to be lower than in non-unionized ones. Not saying it's a union issue but wondering if the factors that cause staff to move in the direction of unionizing are entrenched and complex.


That’s an interesting question. I do think that you are right, there’s a lot going on. That said, several of the unions are relatively new and it can take a looooooong time to ratify a contract, and I believe things sort of freeze while that is under way in terms of comp, so that could be another contributing factor for some of the newer unions.


School report card is outdated. That is from 2 years ago? The rate was presented at the last board meeting in the 90’s.


Not sure how long ago it was but most of the retention metrics cover teachers who worked at a school in 24-25 and returned for 25-26. So not two years old. Interesting that the letter that goes with the petition suggests very high turnover (but doesn’t provide actual figures), yet the recent retention rate you quoted is 90%. If that is correct, retention is better not worse.


The letter does provide actual figures and you'd know that if you read it: "Due to the culture of micromanagement and fear he has fostered, many
qualified, dedicated staff who have served DCI’s community for years are leaving: over 125 departures since SY23-24"


That’s 3 years ago and it’s not specific for teachers. What is the breakdown of teachers? Majority could be low level staff like aids, facilities, etc..…. What is the total staff at the school - this could mean 10% a year or 40% a year.

If you are going to provide numbers then it needs to be in what context and details. It’s generalizations and stuff like this that when you look at the letter critically, it needs more substance to support.

Generalizations such as this


Need you to complete your sentences Pardo in order to respond. But you already know this detail.

Regardless, it’s a damning number no matter how you cut the data.


Sorry but I’m not Pardo whoever that is. Just a DCI parent who is trying to give you some constructive criticism that throwing out numbers with no context or details is not helpful.

If you have 500 staff members for instance and you lose 40 staff a year, that is just 8% turnover and no those numbers are not damning.


lol. You’re clearly not a DCI parent then if you don’t know 1) who Pardo is and 2) how many staff members there are.

Buh. Bye.
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:If you read the full letter and have ever worked under similar leadership, whether in a public or corporate setting, you’ll understand exactly what it’s describing. The fact that more than 100 teachers have left since the ED started speaks for itself.


The teacher retention issue, is the main issue. It doesn't matter if the school is offering the most advanced and most comprehensive list of IB courses and adding APs etc. if staff aren't there to provide high quality instruction and support students. I guess for kids that can walk themselves through curriculum online it's okay but good teachers that stay are what will make it a really good middle/high school. No idea if this ED is good for that or not.


DCI's teacher retention on the school report card is 73% - which is just about the charter average. While it's not great, has there been a decline over the recent years? Or has retention always been an issue (even before this particular ED and/or the union)? I am always surprised that in unionized charter environments pay and retention seem to be lower than in non-unionized ones. Not saying it's a union issue but wondering if the factors that cause staff to move in the direction of unionizing are entrenched and complex.


That’s an interesting question. I do think that you are right, there’s a lot going on. That said, several of the unions are relatively new and it can take a looooooong time to ratify a contract, and I believe things sort of freeze while that is under way in terms of comp, so that could be another contributing factor for some of the newer unions.


School report card is outdated. That is from 2 years ago? The rate was presented at the last board meeting in the 90’s.


Not sure how long ago it was but most of the retention metrics cover teachers who worked at a school in 24-25 and returned for 25-26. So not two years old. Interesting that the letter that goes with the petition suggests very high turnover (but doesn’t provide actual figures), yet the recent retention rate you quoted is 90%. If that is correct, retention is better not worse.


The letter does provide actual figures and you'd know that if you read it: "Due to the culture of micromanagement and fear he has fostered, many
qualified, dedicated staff who have served DCI’s community for years are leaving: over 125 departures since SY23-24"


That’s 3 years ago and it’s not specific for teachers. What is the breakdown of teachers? Majority could be low level staff like aids, facilities, etc..…. What is the total staff at the school - this could mean 10% a year or 40% a year.

If you are going to provide numbers then it needs to be in what context and details. It’s generalizations and stuff like this that when you look at the letter critically, it needs more substance to support.

Generalizations such as this


Need you to complete your sentences Pardo in order to respond. But you already know this detail.

Regardless, it’s a damning number no matter how you cut the data.


Sorry but I’m not Pardo whoever that is. Just a DCI parent who is trying to give you some constructive criticism that throwing out numbers with no context or details is not helpful.

If you have 500 staff members for instance and you lose 40 staff a year, that is just 8% turnover and no those numbers are not damning.


lol. You’re clearly not a DCI parent then if you don’t know 1) who Pardo is and 2) how many staff members there are.

Buh. Bye.


Wow, rude much. Actually I am a DCI parent but whatever.

If you really are a staff and this is how you act when critical questions are asked, then best of luck to you.
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:Well, I just read the bio of the new high school principal. Doctorate, hispanic and spanish speaking. Worked in various roles as assistant principal, consultant, head of a bilingual school in Columbia, and did the IB diploma program himself.

He sounds like a good replacement for the high school. Of course the last principal was fantastic and loved and will be missed. He will be hard to replace but i’m optimistic.


Wait, Mr Nace left??
My kids are alums and they adored him. The connection he made with such a tough crowd (teens) is Really admirable given his physique, quirks, voice… shoes… He would have been eaten alive in the bad old days.
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:Please read the letter more carefully. People are upset about a culture of fear and retaliation where people are at risk of losing their jobs if they speak up about unjust practices. There is one small part about clocking in and clocking out, but the larger narrative is about an organization run by power and authority. The DP Coordinator, who is beloved by students, parents, and staff, did not get his contract renewed. Students started a petition to have it reinstated, and it has over 700 signatures. He was let go because he sometimes questioned harmful practices. Ask any individual at the school or any parent or student who worked with him. He is one of the most competent people there. That is the culture of the current leadership. Don't ask questions or you're gone. No matter how effective you are at your job. Teaching is hard enough, people. 94% of voting staff do not have confidence in his leadership! Clearly this is about more than clocking in and clocking out.


If I’m gonna ask for anyone to lose their job, I want a list- a bullet point list- of harmful practices,

No one is being specific, at all.


NINETY-FOUR PERCENT OF THE STAFF VOTED NO CONFIDENCE.

That's lower than the President.


Sure. I’d like an enumerated list of grievances. This is the “verify” part of “trust but verify”

Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:Well, I just read the bio of the new high school principal. Doctorate, hispanic and spanish speaking. Worked in various roles as assistant principal, consultant, head of a bilingual school in Columbia, and did the IB diploma program himself.

He sounds like a good replacement for the high school. Of course the last principal was fantastic and loved and will be missed. He will be hard to replace but i’m optimistic.


Wait, Mr Nace left??
My kids are alums and they adored him. The connection he made with such a tough crowd (teens) is Really admirable given his physique, quirks, voice… shoes… He would have been eaten alive in the bad old days.


Yes moved to north to New England area and got an ED position per his email to families.

But hey, I am allegedly not a DCI parent who was the one questioning the numbers above.
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:Well, I just read the bio of the new high school principal. Doctorate, hispanic and spanish speaking. Worked in various roles as assistant principal, consultant, head of a bilingual school in Columbia, and did the IB diploma program himself.

He sounds like a good replacement for the high school. Of course the last principal was fantastic and loved and will be missed. He will be hard to replace but i’m optimistic.


Wait, Mr Nace left??
My kids are alums and they adored him. The connection he made with such a tough crowd (teens) is Really admirable given his physique, quirks, voice… shoes… He would have been eaten alive in the bad old days.


Yes. Rosskamm forced him out
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:Please read the letter more carefully. People are upset about a culture of fear and retaliation where people are at risk of losing their jobs if they speak up about unjust practices. There is one small part about clocking in and clocking out, but the larger narrative is about an organization run by power and authority. The DP Coordinator, who is beloved by students, parents, and staff, did not get his contract renewed. Students started a petition to have it reinstated, and it has over 700 signatures. He was let go because he sometimes questioned harmful practices. Ask any individual at the school or any parent or student who worked with him. He is one of the most competent people there. That is the culture of the current leadership. Don't ask questions or you're gone. No matter how effective you are at your job. Teaching is hard enough, people. 94% of voting staff do not have confidence in his leadership! Clearly this is about more than clocking in and clocking out.


If I’m gonna ask for anyone to lose their job, I want a list- a bullet point list- of harmful practices,

No one is being specific, at all.


NINETY-FOUR PERCENT OF THE STAFF VOTED NO CONFIDENCE.

That's lower than the President.


Sure. I’d like an enumerated list of grievances. This is the “verify” part of “trust but verify”



I read the letter from the staff so you don't have to. Or apparently want to. Here's what stood out to me:
- The beloved DP Coordinator's contract was not renewed and 744 students signed a petition to reinstate him
- The MYP Coordinator resigned in February with no succession plan and no communication to families and this directly threatens DCI's IB re-evaluation in 27-28
- 37 special education, EL, counseling, and support staff have left since 2023. Nearly 500 students with IEPs and 504s are affected, and the school may be out of legal compliance
- A senior leader made a racist joke about ICE to his team during a period when staff, students, and families were directly impacted and faced no meaningful accountability
- The ED and another leader received $30K bonuses each while aides took home less pay than last year due to how 'raises' were structured
- Over 125 staff departures since SY23-24

The staff letter also documents a pattern of silencing: staff told to 'stop amplifying complainers,' called 'cynical,' and warned that raising concerns is 'dragging down morale.'
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:Well, I just read the bio of the new high school principal. Doctorate, hispanic and spanish speaking. Worked in various roles as assistant principal, consultant, head of a bilingual school in Columbia, and did the IB diploma program himself.

He sounds like a good replacement for the high school. Of course the last principal was fantastic and loved and will be missed. He will be hard to replace but i’m optimistic.


Wait, Mr Nace left??
My kids are alums and they adored him. The connection he made with such a tough crowd (teens) is Really admirable given his physique, quirks, voice… shoes… He would have been eaten alive in the bad old days.


Yes. Rosskamm forced him out


Really and yet the letter said that he would be in contact with Rosskamm and work with him and see how the 2 schools might support each other in a partnership.

If he was pushed out, why would he want to do that?
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:Please read the letter more carefully. People are upset about a culture of fear and retaliation where people are at risk of losing their jobs if they speak up about unjust practices. There is one small part about clocking in and clocking out, but the larger narrative is about an organization run by power and authority. The DP Coordinator, who is beloved by students, parents, and staff, did not get his contract renewed. Students started a petition to have it reinstated, and it has over 700 signatures. He was let go because he sometimes questioned harmful practices. Ask any individual at the school or any parent or student who worked with him. He is one of the most competent people there. That is the culture of the current leadership. Don't ask questions or you're gone. No matter how effective you are at your job. Teaching is hard enough, people. 94% of voting staff do not have confidence in his leadership! Clearly this is about more than clocking in and clocking out.


If I’m gonna ask for anyone to lose their job, I want a list- a bullet point list- of harmful practices,

No one is being specific, at all.


NINETY-FOUR PERCENT OF THE STAFF VOTED NO CONFIDENCE.

That's lower than the President.


Sure. I’d like an enumerated list of grievances. This is the “verify” part of “trust but verify”



I read the letter from the staff so you don't have to. Or apparently want to. Here's what stood out to me:
- The beloved DP Coordinator's contract was not renewed and 744 students signed a petition to reinstate him
- The MYP Coordinator resigned in February with no succession plan and no communication to families and this directly threatens DCI's IB re-evaluation in 27-28
- 37 special education, EL, counseling, and support staff have left since 2023. Nearly 500 students with IEPs and 504s are affected, and the school may be out of legal compliance
- A senior leader made a racist joke about ICE to his team during a period when staff, students, and families were directly impacted and faced no meaningful accountability
- The ED and another leader received $30K bonuses each while aides took home less pay than last year due to how 'raises' were structured
- Over 125 staff departures since SY23-24

The staff letter also documents a pattern of silencing: staff told to 'stop amplifying complainers,' called 'cynical,' and warned that raising concerns is 'dragging down morale.'


To be fair points 1 and 2,
I read somewhere or maybe it was said at the board meeting, I can’t remember but these responsibilities and role were filled with staff.

Point 3 SPED positions are hard to fill and not unique to DCI. I would want to know if there was some restructuring of SPED dept and if some of these positions were let go and duties re-assigned and what was the reason for some of the staff that left.

Point 4 the person was suspended so not sure what you mean by no accountability.

Point 5 - what is the structure of ED and staff pay. Is this structured separately? Also the school had to structure those staff pay differently I read somewhere and they could not be salaried. Need more details on this. Also is the school budget less with less funding and they had to do budget cuts?

Point 6 - so that’s about 40 staff a year which BTW was not detailed if teachers at all and details on which staff position and percentages per year of overall staff.
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:Many DCI parents have written to the Board expressing their concerns about the damage Rosskamm is doing.

Here's the letter my husband and I sent:

Dear Members of the Board of Trustees,

We are writing as DCI parents. And as LAMB parents who lived through the events of 2017.

We want to be very direct: We are frustrated and angry to find ourselves in this position again.

Nine years ago, our sons were students at LAMB. Today, our daughter is there and our sons are now at DCI. We are heartbroken that another school community we love is in crisis, that another Board is being asked to choose between an executive and the institution it governs, and that the parents and staff who are sounding the alarm loudly, clearly, and at significant personal risk are once again being met with deflection instead of action.

What we know from living through the LAMB crisis is that the parents who show up in moments like this are not troublemakers. They are the school's most committed advocates, and their urgency is a measure of how much they believe DCI is worth saving. We share that belief completely and we are here, again, because of it.

When Mr. Fernandez was arrested we initially defended the LAMB administration. We believed in the school. We trusted its leaders. We gave them the benefit of the doubt because we could not imagine that the institution we had entrusted with our children had failed so profoundly. That instinct, to protect the school by protecting its leadership, felt like loyalty. It was not. It was blindness.

What changed for us was the evidence other parents and staff shared. The repeated red flags that had been ignored. The staff who had raised concerns and been disregarded. The children who had been harmed while the administration operated from a posture of self-protection rather than accountability. When we finally saw clearly, we joined all the other LAMB parents in demanding that the Board act, independently, decisively, and in the interest of children over institution.

The LAMB Board ultimately did act. They acknowledged that their administrators had failed and they removed the Executive Director. They chose the school over the administrators who had led it astray. LAMB survived and now it thrives.

We are now watching the DCI Board face the same choice LAMB's Board faced and we are watching it make the wrong one.

On the surface the situations are not identical. Mr. Rosskamm has not been accused of criminal conduct. But the pattern is familiar and it is damning: staff raise concerns, leadership dismisses them, the concerns compound, the culture deteriorates, and the Board, the body whose sole obligation is to the mission and to the community, protects the executive instead of the school.

Ninety-four percent of DCI's non-supervisory staff have voted no confidence in Mr. Rosskamm. Over 125 staff have departed since SY23-24. The IB Diploma Coordinator's contract was not renewed. The MYP Coordinator resigned abruptly. These are not personnel inconveniences. These are structural warnings.

And yet the Board's response or lack thereof, especially at the March 19th public meeting and in the communications that have followed, has been to suppress dialogue, deflect accountability, and allow Mr. Rosskamm to manage his own consequence through town halls and listening sessions that result in no change and that his own staff have already declared they do not trust.

We want to be direct about Board Chair Pardo specifically. Her conduct of the March 19th meeting, the deliberate foreclosure of public comment, the alignment with Mr. Rosskamm's framing, the failure to treat the staff's extraordinary vote of no confidence as the serious governance crisis it is, was not neutral. It was a choice. Chair Pardo has not demonstrated the independence this moment demands, and her continued leadership of this board in this crisis is itself a barrier to resolution. We are calling for her to step down as Chair.

We say this not with hostility but with clarity born of experience. At LAMB, the Board's willingness to act over the objections of an administration that had failed is what saved the school. What would have destroyed LAMB was a Board that prioritized protecting leadership over protecting the community it existed to serve.

DCI is a remarkable school. Its IB for All model, its language immersion programs, its diverse and committed community are worth fighting for. We are fighting for them now, as we fought for LAMB then.

The staff have done their part. They documented their concerns. They exhausted every formal channel. They took the extraordinary step of a vote of no confidence at significant personal risk. Nineteen staff members abstained from that vote not because they lacked an opinion, but because they feared retaliation. That is the culture this Board has allowed to take root.

Our daughter is sitting in a LAMB classroom right now. We chose LAMB for her because of what this family of schools represents and because we believed that what we went through in 2017 had made the school stronger and more accountable. We need this board to prove that belief was not misplaced.

You have a decision to make. You can choose, as LAMB's Board ultimately chose, to place the mission above the executive. You can remove Mr. Rosskamm, reconstitute Board leadership, and give this school the chance to rebuild trust and retain the extraordinary educators who have not yet left. Or you can continue on the current path and watch DCI become a cautionary tale told by the next generation of DC education advocates.


We have seen what happens when a Board finds its courage too late. We have also seen what happens when it finds it in time.


A bit too AI sloppy, but I was also there at LAMB back then + DCI now and this also has been a bit triggering.

Still, I'd love to have one of those town halls where the board and admin stand in front of an angry mob of parents and staff and try to explain why they're not doing anything about a major problem.

While I agree with others above that there still aren't enough tangible details as to what this ED has been doing to make the climate so bad, it does seem clear that we're in trouble because we need the top teachers and staff to STAY on board! That is the key ingredient to a good school, which we found out at LAMB. The staff/teachers also turned LAMB upside down when the pandemic ED was there and she wasn't well liked and they began leaving and being pushed out. Thankfully quite a few have returned. Veteran quality teachers MATTER to parents and kids way more than some ED.
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:Please read the letter more carefully. People are upset about a culture of fear and retaliation where people are at risk of losing their jobs if they speak up about unjust practices. There is one small part about clocking in and clocking out, but the larger narrative is about an organization run by power and authority. The DP Coordinator, who is beloved by students, parents, and staff, did not get his contract renewed. Students started a petition to have it reinstated, and it has over 700 signatures. He was let go because he sometimes questioned harmful practices. Ask any individual at the school or any parent or student who worked with him. He is one of the most competent people there. That is the culture of the current leadership. Don't ask questions or you're gone. No matter how effective you are at your job. Teaching is hard enough, people. 94% of voting staff do not have confidence in his leadership! Clearly this is about more than clocking in and clocking out.


If I’m gonna ask for anyone to lose their job, I want a list- a bullet point list- of harmful practices,

No one is being specific, at all.


NINETY-FOUR PERCENT OF THE STAFF VOTED NO CONFIDENCE.

That's lower than the President.


Sure. I’d like an enumerated list of grievances. This is the “verify” part of “trust but verify”



I read the letter from the staff so you don't have to. Or apparently want to. Here's what stood out to me:
- The beloved DP Coordinator's contract was not renewed and 744 students signed a petition to reinstate him
- The MYP Coordinator resigned in February with no succession plan and no communication to families and this directly threatens DCI's IB re-evaluation in 27-28
- 37 special education, EL, counseling, and support staff have left since 2023. Nearly 500 students with IEPs and 504s are affected, and the school may be out of legal compliance
- A senior leader made a racist joke about ICE to his team during a period when staff, students, and families were directly impacted and faced no meaningful accountability
- The ED and another leader received $30K bonuses each while aides took home less pay than last year due to how 'raises' were structured
- Over 125 staff departures since SY23-24

The staff letter also documents a pattern of silencing: staff told to 'stop amplifying complainers,' called 'cynical,' and warned that raising concerns is 'dragging down morale.'


To be fair points 1 and 2,
I read somewhere or maybe it was said at the board meeting, I can’t remember but these responsibilities and role were filled with staff.

Point 3 SPED positions are hard to fill and not unique to DCI. I would want to know if there was some restructuring of SPED dept and if some of these positions were let go and duties re-assigned and what was the reason for some of the staff that left.

Point 4 the person was suspended so not sure what you mean by no accountability.

Point 5 - what is the structure of ED and staff pay. Is this structured separately? Also the school had to structure those staff pay differently I read somewhere and they could not be salaried. Need more details on this. Also is the school budget less with less funding and they had to do budget cuts?

Point 6 - so that’s about 40 staff a year which BTW was not detailed if teachers at all and details on which staff position and percentages per year of overall staff.


1&2) The MYP and DP coordinators are a general teaching vacancy you backfill with a warm body. Those roles are among the most specialized roles in an IB school. They require IB-specific training and certification, deep familiarity with IB standards and practices, and years of experience managing the program's assessments, unit planning, and external evaluations. The DP Coordinator specifically oversees the Extended Essay, Theory of Knowledge, and the full diploma candidacy process - work that directly determines whether students earn IB diplomas. The MYP Coordinator manages Personal and Community Projects, which are IB requirements, not optional programming. You cannot just redistribute these responsibilities to existing staff who are already stretched. The letter specifically says the replacement MYP posting adds unrelated coaching duties that will impede the coordinator's actual IB work. Filling a seat isn't the same as maintaining program integrity, especially with an IB re-evaluation coming in 27-28, where the school will have to demonstrate it has been running the program with fidelity.

3) Sure SPED is hard to fill everywhere but 37 departures from one department at one school since 2023 is not a national trend. That's a retention crisis. And given how hard those roles are to fill, should be even more of a retention priority. And the letter isn't just about vacancies, it's about legal compliance. IEP triennial evaluations only happening when case managers catch the oversight themselves is a liability issue, full stop.

4) A short administrative leave after a racist ICE joke, then returned to their position, is not accountability. It's optics.

5) The letter is explicit. The ED and a colleague took $30K bonuses each. Aides had hours cut so that negotiated raises were effectively nullified. DCI has posted multi-million dollar surpluses. This isn't a budget crisis, it's the ED's choice.

6) 125 departures over roughly two years at a school of DCI's size is significant attrition by any HR benchmark. The composition matters too, and the letter does specify: IB coordinators, language teachers, SPED staff, counselors, social workers. These aren't interchangeable roles.
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:Well, I just read the bio of the new high school principal. Doctorate, hispanic and spanish speaking. Worked in various roles as assistant principal, consultant, head of a bilingual school in Columbia, and did the IB diploma program himself.

He sounds like a good replacement for the high school. Of course the last principal was fantastic and loved and will be missed. He will be hard to replace but i’m optimistic.


Wait, Mr Nace left??
My kids are alums and they adored him. The connection he made with such a tough crowd (teens) is Really admirable given his physique, quirks, voice… shoes… He would have been eaten alive in the bad old days.


Yes. Rosskamm forced him out


Really and yet the letter said that he would be in contact with Rosskamm and work with him and see how the 2 schools might support each other in a partnership.

If he was pushed out, why would he want to do that?


Because he's a professional? Who cares about the institution he gave years to?

If Rosskamm truly forced Nace and Miller out, that's all I needed to hear. Mike's gotta GO. How could you have staff members like that and not see their value? Only if you're a shit executive.

My kids (DCI alumni) say that Miller's non-renewal has fired up their socials and gotten them back in touch with people from HS out of sheer fury.
Anonymous
Certainly the kids are fired up. They've all signed this petition even the younger ones.
post reply Forum Index » DC Public and Public Charter Schools
Message Quick Reply
Go to: