SSFS HOS leaving

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I’m curious. Is it a small group of people who are writing on here? We’ve now beaten a dead horse here. I was a new parent this past year and didn’t notice all the things mentioned, but now it just seems like people are just upset and needlessly venting about stupid things like the shoes at graduation.

Then your head was in the sand. RG is an eloquent speaker, I’ll give him that, but there is ZERO substance behind a single word he says. He has no integrity. There are no ACTIONS to his words. Just words. He can weave a beautiful sentence together, but it stops there. He was absent on campus. Hardly ever there. Always galavanting around engaging in his other endeavors - which were aplenty. If the spotlight was on, he was there - time to receive a banner in athletics or a performance on stage? Check! He’ll be there for the photo op. However, in the doldrums of the day to day, he was like an absentee parent.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’m curious. Is it a small group of people who are writing on here? We’ve now beaten a dead horse here. I was a new parent this past year and didn’t notice all the things mentioned, but now it just seems like people are just upset and needlessly venting about stupid things like the shoes at graduation.

Then your head was in the sand. RG is an eloquent speaker, I’ll give him that, but there is ZERO substance behind a single word he says. He has no integrity. There are no ACTIONS to his words. Just words. He can weave a beautiful sentence together, but it stops there. He was absent on campus. Hardly ever there. Always galavanting around engaging in his other endeavors - which were aplenty. If the spotlight was on, he was there - time to receive a banner in athletics or a performance on stage? Check! He’ll be there for the photo op. However, in the doldrums of the day to day, he was like an absentee parent.

I had the dubious privilege of conferring with him on different issues but saw very quickly that what he said behind close doors did not match the messaging he sent out. I knew then he was a fraud and willfully keeping information from the parent community.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’m curious. Is it a small group of people who are writing on here? We’ve now beaten a dead horse here. I was a new parent this past year and didn’t notice all the things mentioned, but now it just seems like people are just upset and needlessly venting about stupid things like the shoes at graduation.

Then your head was in the sand. RG is an eloquent speaker, I’ll give him that, but there is ZERO substance behind a single word he says. He has no integrity. There are no ACTIONS to his words. Just words. He can weave a beautiful sentence together, but it stops there. He was absent on campus. Hardly ever there. Always galavanting around engaging in his other endeavors - which were aplenty. If the spotlight was on, he was there - time to receive a banner in athletics or a performance on stage? Check! He’ll be there for the photo op. However, in the doldrums of the day to day, he was like an absentee parent.

I really have to disagree that he’s a good speaker. Maybe one exposure could make you think “oh that was sort of different” but I don’t see how you could maintain that stance after more than one exposure. He’s style was tired and trite and off-putting, in my opinion.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:1970s alumni here - We did not graduate in barefeet. Shoes were required for graduation and we were the height of the "hippie" years. We were the first graduating class where the girls did not have to wear white dresses but our dresses did have to be pre-approved.

Early 2000’s alum here who did not wear shoes to graduation in the Sandy Spring meeting house…

[Anonymous]

Email to the parent community was a complete joke. At the start of the message, the co-clerks wrote that they would address three main concerns that were made clear at the listening sessions, one of which was financial status of the school. They addressed two other issues but NOT the financial status!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Email to the parent community was a complete joke. At the start of the message, the co-clerks wrote that they would address three main concerns that were made clear at the listening sessions, one of which was financial status of the school. They addressed two other issues but NOT the financial status!

I don't think that email was the place to address the financial status of the school. The email laid out the biggest concerns and what is being handled. To me, that suggested the financial concerns are not as bad as we think they are so not taking center stage in recovery. Perhaps I'm being naive, but I feel like if that was the #1 issue, it would have been addressed as such.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Email to the parent community was a complete joke. At the start of the message, the co-clerks wrote that they would address three main concerns that were made clear at the listening sessions, one of which was financial status of the school. They addressed two other issues but NOT the financial status!

I don't think that email was the place to address the financial status of the school. The email laid out the biggest concerns and what is being handled. To me, that suggested the financial concerns are not as bad as we think they are so not taking center stage in recovery. Perhaps I'm being naive, but I feel like if that was the #1 issue, it would have been addressed as such.

NP here, and the problem for me is that the email said it was going to talk about the 3 main concerns and then just totally left out the financial piece. So now it's Chekov's gun - they brought it up, but when is it going to show up again? Truly, all they had to do was say that they heard the concerns over the financial status, and that this email is not the venue to address that issue but that the school is financially solvent, or that further information will be provided after the start of the year, or WHATEVER. Anything. But they just left it hanging out there.

[Anonymous]

10:04, and I need to retract my comment because a new email was sent that contained the missing info.

[Anonymous]

Can some sum up exactly what RG did to be fired? Can't seem to find a straight answer.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Can some sum up exactly what RG did to be fired? Can't seem to find a straight answer.

For starters, he couldn’t keep admin bc he treated everyone like garbage. In his tenure, they were on their 4th US head in as many years, 4th LS head in as many years, 4th DEI coordinator in as many years (the last two women didn’t even finish the school year and the most current one is suing him), and he ended this school year with the highest attrition rate probably ever which lead to layoffs of employees completely out of the blue on the last day of school for teachers. So, I’d say that scratches the surface. Just scratches the surface…..

[Anonymous]

Oh dang! Thanks for letting me know. I've been on the interest group video conference meetings but no one ever said exactly why. Thanks again for clearing it up.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Can some sum up exactly what RG did to be fired? Can't seem to find a straight answer.

For starters, he couldn’t keep admin bc he treated everyone like garbage. In his tenure, they were on their 4th US head in as many years, 4th LS head in as many years, 4th DEI coordinator in as many years (the last two women didn’t even finish the school year and the most current one is suing him), and he ended this school year with the highest attrition rate probably ever which lead to layoffs of employees completely out of the blue on the last day of school for teachers. So, I’d say that scratches the surface. Just scratches the surface…..

Whoa, why suing him?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Email to the parent community was a complete joke. At the start of the message, the co-clerks wrote that they would address three main concerns that were made clear at the listening sessions, one of which was financial status of the school. They addressed two other issues but NOT the financial status!

I don't think that email was the place to address the financial status of the school. The email laid out the biggest concerns and what is being handled. To me, that suggested the financial concerns are not as bad as we think they are so not taking center stage in recovery. Perhaps I'm being naive, but I feel like if that was the #1 issue, it would have been addressed as such.

I read that as the financial status is so bad they can't cover it in a message. If it was good, they'd actually be happy to give the "good" numbers right up front. Or they don't know the financial status because they're still figuring it out. But then they'd say they are figuring it out. to me, no news, in this case does not mean good news.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Can some sum up exactly what RG did to be fired? Can't seem to find a straight answer.

I assume, this means your kids don't go to this school? Seems like you'd know if they did.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Can some sum up exactly what RG did to be fired? Can't seem to find a straight answer.

For starters, he couldn’t keep admin bc he treated everyone like garbage. In his tenure, they were on their 4th US head in as many years, 4th LS head in as many years, 4th DEI coordinator in as many years (the last two women didn’t even finish the school year and the most current one is suing him), and he ended this school year with the highest attrition rate probably ever which lead to layoffs of employees completely out of the blue on the last day of school for teachers. So, I’d say that scratches the surface. Just scratches the surface…..

I didnt know TO was suing him but I can't blame her. I've never understood why as a DEI expert RG can't even maintain his DEI dept hires? What a joke.