Dr. Felder told not to apply for permanent superintendent role according to sources

[Anonymous]

She's not working virtually. She is here in person bullying everyone.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:She's not working virtually. She is here in person bullying everyone.

Well at least someone is doing work at central office.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:How many people are going to be let go or involuntarily transferred in each school?

Sounds like one per school, in selected schools.

Cuts in all schools. More than one position in some middle schools and average of 3 in high schools

Not in all schools. Some have posted on this forum that their school received no cuts.

How is this possible when principals were told to absorb the SDTs? That’s a 0.4 reduction in teaching allocations alone right there

Affluent schools often have a different set of rules. They do, after all, contribute more taxes.

Yes. They have far fewer teachers.

Exactly. People don’t seem to realize that the “affluent schools” have been getting short changed on resources for a long, long time now because they were “affluent”. When the school is already at the state mandated maximum class sizes, it is not legal to cut more teacher positions.

They typically also have a lower need burden with less diverse needs.

The question might be put, for a given student/family considering schools, how might their educational experience at School A, with a highly affluent population and higher student-teacher ratio, compare to that at School B, with a less affluent population and a lower student-teacher ratio. Until there is ambivalence, an answer in favor of School A (where, e.g., relatively homogeneous needs might allow for greater enrichment/more advanced class options despite the higher ratio) argues for more personnel at School B, as the school system is the entity legally responsible for meeting equal protection across the county.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:She's not working virtually. She is here in person bullying everyone.

Well at least someone is doing work at central office.

Agree. She sounds good.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:How many people are going to be let go or involuntarily transferred in each school?

Sounds like one per school, in selected schools.

Cuts in all schools. More than one position in some middle schools and average of 3 in high schools

Not in all schools. Some have posted on this forum that their school received no cuts.

How is this possible when principals were told to absorb the SDTs? That’s a 0.4 reduction in teaching allocations alone right there

Affluent schools often have a different set of rules. They do, after all, contribute more taxes.

Yes. They have far fewer teachers.

Exactly. People don’t seem to realize that the “affluent schools” have been getting short changed on resources for a long, long time now because they were “affluent”. When the school is already at the state mandated maximum class sizes, it is not legal to cut more teacher positions.

That's not true. I saw the data MCPS released recently and our W has way better student teacher ratio and many more course offerings than any East county HS.

The HS course offer across schools definitely needs to be reviewed. There are many course offerings especially electives that are not offered everywhere.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:https://parentscoalitionmc.blogspot.com/2024/06/interim-superintendent-felder-humbled.html

BOE has a knack for picking the worst candidates lately. I guess it’s not illegal for her to vote in NC? But she obviously knew that far back she was not going to be the permanent super.

I wouldn't pay too much attention to the parent's coalition. They seem like disgruntled RWNJs. Felder is probably working remotely. Lots of people do it. It's no biggie.

Parents Coalition gets its facts straight, per the evidence it posted of Felder's voting in NC in person. I don't care if Felder has made the personal decision to remain an NC resident. I do expect her to be in person at her interim position at MCPS. It is a biggie to be present for the job of superintendent. You can't zoom your job in with that position.

Actually it can be for a time. Whether everyone like that this is a privilege of the job is a different story. A grocery store executive can zoom their job, but the person responsible for stocking the shelves can’t. They both work for the same organization but have different job function and abilities.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:https://parentscoalitionmc.blogspot.com/2024/06/interim-superintendent-felder-humbled.html

BOE has a knack for picking the worst candidates lately. I guess it’s not illegal for her to vote in NC? But she obviously knew that far back she was not going to be the permanent super.

Hopefully this means she’s heading back to NC at the end of June when her stint as interim supe is over.

[Anonymous]

The Parents' Coalition is dumb. Felder took a temporary position with MCPS. Who knows where she is staying or what her living arrangements are. For all we know she is spending half the week in MoCo and half the week in NC. Probably still has an NC address. As long as hasn't left NC indefinitely she's still eligible to vote there.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The Parents' Coalition is dumb. Felder took a temporary position with MCPS. Who knows where she is staying or what her living arrangements are. For all we know she is spending half the week in MoCo and half the week in NC. Probably still has an NC address. As long as hasn't left NC indefinitely she's still eligible to vote there.

She also voted early on a Saturday. She could have driven down for the weekend.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:She's not working virtually. She is here in person bullying everyone.

You say bully. I say standing up for all that is good and making a difference.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:How many people are going to be let go or involuntarily transferred in each school?

Sounds like one per school, in selected schools.

Cuts in all schools. More than one position in some middle schools and average of 3 in high schools

Not in all schools. Some have posted on this forum that their school received no cuts.

How is this possible when principals were told to absorb the SDTs? That’s a 0.4 reduction in teaching allocations alone right there

Affluent schools often have a different set of rules. They do, after all, contribute more taxes.

Yes. They have far fewer teachers.

Exactly. People don’t seem to realize that the “affluent schools” have been getting short changed on resources for a long, long time now because they were “affluent”. When the school is already at the state mandated maximum class sizes, it is not legal to cut more teacher positions.

They typically also have a lower need burden with less diverse needs.

The question might be put, for a given student/family considering schools, how might their educational experience at School A, with a highly affluent population and higher student-teacher ratio, compare to that at School B, with a less affluent population and a lower student-teacher ratio. Until there is ambivalence, an answer in favor of School A (where, e.g., relatively homogeneous needs might allow for greater enrichment/more advanced class options despite the higher ratio) argues for more personnel at School B, as the school system is the entity legally responsible for meeting equal protection across the county.

The data the county recently published showed that Whitman got more $/student than most any DCC school.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The Parents' Coalition is dumb. Felder took a temporary position with MCPS. Who knows where she is staying or what her living arrangements are. For all we know she is spending half the week in MoCo and half the week in NC. Probably still has an NC address. As long as hasn't left NC indefinitely she's still eligible to vote there.

These guys can't stand that an AA woman is in charge and just want to find fault. It was the same with McKnight from day 1.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:She's not working virtually. She is here in person bullying everyone.

You say bully. I say standing up for all that is good and making a difference.

Hi,Dr. Felder. You’re doing a terrible job. Please resign.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:How many people are going to be let go or involuntarily transferred in each school?

Sounds like one per school, in selected schools.

Cuts in all schools. More than one position in some middle schools and average of 3 in high schools

Not in all schools. Some have posted on this forum that their school received no cuts.

How is this possible when principals were told to absorb the SDTs? That’s a 0.4 reduction in teaching allocations alone right there

Affluent schools often have a different set of rules. They do, after all, contribute more taxes.

Yes. They have far fewer teachers.

Exactly. People don’t seem to realize that the “affluent schools” have been getting short changed on resources for a long, long time now because they were “affluent”. When the school is already at the state mandated maximum class sizes, it is not legal to cut more teacher positions.

They typically also have a lower need burden with less diverse needs.

The question might be put, for a given student/family considering schools, how might their educational experience at School A, with a highly affluent population and higher student-teacher ratio, compare to that at School B, with a less affluent population and a lower student-teacher ratio. Until there is ambivalence, an answer in favor of School A (where, e.g., relatively homogeneous needs might allow for greater enrichment/more advanced class options despite the higher ratio) argues for more personnel at School B, as the school system is the entity legally responsible for meeting equal protection across the county.

The data the county recently published showed that Whitman got more $/student than most any DCC school.

That doesn’t mean more staff. It like means that Whitman’s teacher have been teachers longer on average than DCC as a whole. Note - teaching for longer doesn’t necessarily mean a better teacher.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:How many people are going to be let go or involuntarily transferred in each school?

Sounds like one per school, in selected schools.

Cuts in all schools. More than one position in some middle schools and average of 3 in high schools

Not in all schools. Some have posted on this forum that their school received no cuts.

How is this possible when principals were told to absorb the SDTs? That’s a 0.4 reduction in teaching allocations alone right there

Affluent schools often have a different set of rules. They do, after all, contribute more taxes.

Yes. They have far fewer teachers.

Exactly. People don’t seem to realize that the “affluent schools” have been getting short changed on resources for a long, long time now because they were “affluent”. When the school is already at the state mandated maximum class sizes, it is not legal to cut more teacher positions.

They typically also have a lower need burden with less diverse needs.

The question might be put, for a given student/family considering schools, how might their educational experience at School A, with a highly affluent population and higher student-teacher ratio, compare to that at School B, with a less affluent population and a lower student-teacher ratio. Until there is ambivalence, an answer in favor of School A (where, e.g., relatively homogeneous needs might allow for greater enrichment/more advanced class options despite the higher ratio) argues for more personnel at School B, as the school system is the entity legally responsible for meeting equal protection across the county.

The data the county recently published showed that Whitman got more $/student than most any DCC school.

That doesn’t mean more staff. It like means that Whitman’s teacher have been teachers longer on average than DCC as a whole. Note - teaching for longer doesn’t necessarily mean a better teacher.

research shows teacher experience does matter and it's a disservice to low income students to wave away concerns that they have less access to experienced teachers