New Superintendent to be named on February 8th

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I don't work at central office but have a friend who does and she says McKnight is toxic and vindictive. She plays favorites and is driving away some competent people who don't buy into her cult of personality. Believe me, parents aren't the only people who have noticed how much of the communication coming out of MCPS highlights how Monifa did this, or Monifa did that, instead of highlighting the successes of our kids, teachers, and administrators.

LOL! "Friend" of an anonymous message board mom.

Major credibility fail.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Wow - that seems so soon. I feel like the last time we at least heard names of candidates. This time nada.

Are they getting better at keeping things quiet or will McKnight automatically get the job because they really didn't do a deep search into anyone else?

I wonder that too. Everything is behind the closed doors now. No transparency at all.

That’s Brenda Wolff and it’s intentional. We should expect better. The process has clearly been orchestrated to anoint McKnight. Regardless of your feelings about her, people should be very concerned about the lack of an open and transparent process.

I don't think we heard the names of several candidates under consideration during past superintendent searches. We did hear one time about a preferred candidate who then pulled himself from consideration.

During prior searches there was at least clearly communicated timelines and processes.

Seems to me the process has been the same as the last few searches; they're even using the same search firm they always have. This timeline has been on their website for months: https://www.montgomeryschoolsmd.org/boe/superintendent-search/
I think this is standard operating procedure for MCPS.

Same process? Then name the parents that were secretly allowed to interview the candidates? In the past, those groups were known. This time? Not so much.

This list has been posted on the page linked above:

https://www.montgomeryschoolsmd.org/uploadedFiles/boe/superintendent-search/Web%20Panel%20Members%20.pdf

Today.
You meant to say the list has been posted today because it wasn't there earlier this week.
Good work staff, refusing to tell reporters what is going on then quietly posting information and leaking it on an anonymous chat room. Classy.

Sorry to disappoint you, but I don't work for MPCS. I'm just a parent who was on their web site the other day and saw the link about the interview committee. It was probably Monday or Tuesday this week that I saw it there and clicked on it.

It wasn't there then. Your fake parent comment isn't cutting it. Time to clock out for the day.

NP. There are ways to check when a page was last update. According to the google cache checker, the page was last cached on 1/31. Which was Monday.

Which means that you're likely wrong.

I hate MCPS comms but I think you're off on this one

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:When is the next elections to vote the BOE out? MCPS use to be highly rated, not anymore. Where is the transparency? Why did the BOE get rid of mid-terms and finals? Our kids are going to have a hard time in college when they fully understand what a mid-term and final is. All of these do-overs is too much. How can anyone fail in MCPS?

There have not been finals in MCPS for about 10 years and MCPS students are still doing great in colleges.
find something else to troll

You mean they are doing great at Montgomery College. Because that's where most of them end up even if they announce they are going away.

NP. Many high school graduates end up at local community college isn't a damning fact (although the actual number isn't "most," it's 20-25% of recent graduates out of the 80% total enrolling in college shortly after high school). MC is a great option for a lot of kids. We're lucky to have it.

I know this is a bit off topic, but the percentage of kids who enroll at MC and finish an associates degree in four years is about 22%. The rest drop out or transfer. It is a bit of a disservice to blindly push kids to go there. It sets too many up for failure.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Wow - that seems so soon. I feel like the last time we at least heard names of candidates. This time nada.

Are they getting better at keeping things quiet or will McKnight automatically get the job because they really didn't do a deep search into anyone else?

I wonder that too. Everything is behind the closed doors now. No transparency at all.

That’s Brenda Wolff and it’s intentional. We should expect better. The process has clearly been orchestrated to anoint McKnight. Regardless of your feelings about her, people should be very concerned about the lack of an open and transparent process.

I don't think we heard the names of several candidates under consideration during past superintendent searches. We did hear one time about a preferred candidate who then pulled himself from consideration.

During prior searches there was at least clearly communicated timelines and processes.

Seems to me the process has been the same as the last few searches; they're even using the same search firm they always have. This timeline has been on their website for months: https://www.montgomeryschoolsmd.org/boe/superintendent-search/
I think this is standard operating procedure for MCPS.

Same process? Then name the parents that were secretly allowed to interview the candidates? In the past, those groups were known. This time? Not so much.

This list has been posted on the page linked above:

https://www.montgomeryschoolsmd.org/uploadedFiles/boe/superintendent-search/Web%20Panel%20Members%20.pdf

Today.
You meant to say the list has been posted today because it wasn't there earlier this week.
Good work staff, refusing to tell reporters what is going on then quietly posting information and leaking it on an anonymous chat room. Classy.

Sorry to disappoint you, but I don't work for MPCS. I'm just a parent who was on their web site the other day and saw the link about the interview committee. It was probably Monday or Tuesday this week that I saw it there and clicked on it.

It wasn't there then. Your fake parent comment isn't cutting it. Time to clock out for the day.

NP. There are ways to check when a page was last update. According to the google cache checker, the page was last cached on 1/31. Which was Monday.

Which means that you're likely wrong.

I hate MCPS comms but I think you're off on this one

So MCPS lied to Catilyn Peetz and wouldn't tell her how many people interviewed but had secretly put up that number days before her story?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Wow - that seems so soon. I feel like the last time we at least heard names of candidates. This time nada.

Are they getting better at keeping things quiet or will McKnight automatically get the job because they really didn't do a deep search into anyone else?

I wonder that too. Everything is behind the closed doors now. No transparency at all.

That’s Brenda Wolff and it’s intentional. We should expect better. The process has clearly been orchestrated to anoint McKnight. Regardless of your feelings about her, people should be very concerned about the lack of an open and transparent process.

I don't think we heard the names of several candidates under consideration during past superintendent searches. We did hear one time about a preferred candidate who then pulled himself from consideration.

During prior searches there was at least clearly communicated timelines and processes.

Seems to me the process has been the same as the last few searches; they're even using the same search firm they always have. This timeline has been on their website for months: https://www.montgomeryschoolsmd.org/boe/superintendent-search/
I think this is standard operating procedure for MCPS.

Same process? Then name the parents that were secretly allowed to interview the candidates? In the past, those groups were known. This time? Not so much.

This list has been posted on the page linked above:

https://www.montgomeryschoolsmd.org/uploadedFiles/boe/superintendent-search/Web%20Panel%20Members%20.pdf

Today.
You meant to say the list has been posted today because it wasn't there earlier this week.
Good work staff, refusing to tell reporters what is going on then quietly posting information and leaking it on an anonymous chat room. Classy.

Sorry to disappoint you, but I don't work for MPCS. I'm just a parent who was on their web site the other day and saw the link about the interview committee. It was probably Monday or Tuesday this week that I saw it there and clicked on it.

It wasn't there then. Your fake parent comment isn't cutting it. Time to clock out for the day.

NP. There are ways to check when a page was last update. According to the google cache checker, the page was last cached on 1/31. Which was Monday.

Which means that you're likely wrong.

I hate MCPS comms but I think you're off on this one

So MCPS lied to Catilyn Peetz and wouldn't tell her how many people interviewed but had secretly put up that number days before her story?

It’s crazy that MCPS people come on this anonymous website to lie so much. Do they realize how much this behavior hurts their reputation?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:When is the next elections to vote the BOE out? MCPS use to be highly rated, not anymore. Where is the transparency? Why did the BOE get rid of mid-terms and finals? Our kids are going to have a hard time in college when they fully understand what a mid-term and final is. All of these do-overs is too much. How can anyone fail in MCPS?

There have not been finals in MCPS for about 10 years and MCPS students are still doing great in colleges.
find something else to troll

You mean they are doing great at Montgomery College. Because that's where most of them end up even if they announce they are going away.

NP. Many high school graduates end up at local community college isn't a damning fact (although the actual number isn't "most," it's 20-25% of recent graduates out of the 80% total enrolling in college shortly after high school). MC is a great option for a lot of kids. We're lucky to have it.

I know this is a bit off topic, but the percentage of kids who enroll at MC and finish an associates degree in four years is about 22%. The rest drop out or transfer. It is a bit of a disservice to blindly push kids to go there. It sets too many up for failure.

How so? Some finish the associate degree, others transfer to 4yr colleges, some decide to pursue another some take some classes and gain additional skills that can put towards working and maybe pursue higher ed later in life, some decide its completely not for them.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:When is the next elections to vote the BOE out? MCPS use to be highly rated, not anymore. Where is the transparency? Why did the BOE get rid of mid-terms and finals? Our kids are going to have a hard time in college when they fully understand what a mid-term and final is. All of these do-overs is too much. How can anyone fail in MCPS?

There have not been finals in MCPS for about 10 years and MCPS students are still doing great in colleges.
find something else to troll

You mean they are doing great at Montgomery College. Because that's where most of them end up even if they announce they are going away.

NP. Many high school graduates end up at local community college isn't a damning fact (although the actual number isn't "most," it's 20-25% of recent graduates out of the 80% total enrolling in college shortly after high school). MC is a great option for a lot of kids. We're lucky to have it.

I know this is a bit off topic, but the percentage of kids who enroll at MC and finish an associates degree in four years is about 22%. The rest drop out or transfer. It is a bit of a disservice to blindly push kids to go there. It sets too many up for failure.

The amount of kids who graduate college nationally is 50%. What is your point?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Wow - that seems so soon. I feel like the last time we at least heard names of candidates. This time nada.

Are they getting better at keeping things quiet or will McKnight automatically get the job because they really didn't do a deep search into anyone else?

I wonder that too. Everything is behind the closed doors now. No transparency at all.

That’s Brenda Wolff and it’s intentional. We should expect better. The process has clearly been orchestrated to anoint McKnight. Regardless of your feelings about her, people should be very concerned about the lack of an open and transparent process.

I don't think we heard the names of several candidates under consideration during past superintendent searches. We did hear one time about a preferred candidate who then pulled himself from consideration.

During prior searches there was at least clearly communicated timelines and processes.

Seems to me the process has been the same as the last few searches; they're even using the same search firm they always have. This timeline has been on their website for months: https://www.montgomeryschoolsmd.org/boe/superintendent-search/
I think this is standard operating procedure for MCPS.

Same process? Then name the parents that were secretly allowed to interview the candidates? In the past, those groups were known. This time? Not so much.

This list has been posted on the page linked above:

https://www.montgomeryschoolsmd.org/uploadedFiles/boe/superintendent-search/Web%20Panel%20Members%20.pdf

Today.
You meant to say the list has been posted today because it wasn't there earlier this week.
Good work staff, refusing to tell reporters what is going on then quietly posting information and leaking it on an anonymous chat room. Classy.

Sorry to disappoint you, but I don't work for MPCS. I'm just a parent who was on their web site the other day and saw the link about the interview committee. It was probably Monday or Tuesday this week that I saw it there and clicked on it.

It wasn't there then. Your fake parent comment isn't cutting it. Time to clock out for the day.

NP. There are ways to check when a page was last update. According to the google cache checker, the page was last cached on 1/31. Which was Monday.

Which means that you're likely wrong.

I hate MCPS comms but I think you're off on this one

So MCPS lied to Catilyn Peetz and wouldn't tell her how many people interviewed but had secretly put up that number days before her story?

You're confused about the order. Peetz wrote a story on 1/27:

https://bethesdamagazine.com/bethesda-beat/schools/mcps-superintendent-search-on-schedule-to-conclude-in-february-district-says/

Then MCPS updated their web page on 1/31. That update included additional details and a link to the interview groups. Now can we end this argument and get back to complaining about all the actual problems MCPS is having?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Wow - that seems so soon. I feel like the last time we at least heard names of candidates. This time nada.

Are they getting better at keeping things quiet or will McKnight automatically get the job because they really didn't do a deep search into anyone else?

I wonder that too. Everything is behind the closed doors now. No transparency at all.

That’s Brenda Wolff and it’s intentional. We should expect better. The process has clearly been orchestrated to anoint McKnight. Regardless of your feelings about her, people should be very concerned about the lack of an open and transparent process.

I don't think we heard the names of several candidates under consideration during past superintendent searches. We did hear one time about a preferred candidate who then pulled himself from consideration.

During prior searches there was at least clearly communicated timelines and processes.

Seems to me the process has been the same as the last few searches; they're even using the same search firm they always have. This timeline has been on their website for months: https://www.montgomeryschoolsmd.org/boe/superintendent-search/
I think this is standard operating procedure for MCPS.

Same process? Then name the parents that were secretly allowed to interview the candidates? In the past, those groups were known. This time? Not so much.

This list has been posted on the page linked above:

https://www.montgomeryschoolsmd.org/uploadedFiles/boe/superintendent-search/Web%20Panel%20Members%20.pdf

Today.
You meant to say the list has been posted today because it wasn't there earlier this week.
Good work staff, refusing to tell reporters what is going on then quietly posting information and leaking it on an anonymous chat room. Classy.

Sorry to disappoint you, but I don't work for MPCS. I'm just a parent who was on their web site the other day and saw the link about the interview committee. It was probably Monday or Tuesday this week that I saw it there and clicked on it.

It wasn't there then. Your fake parent comment isn't cutting it. Time to clock out for the day.

NP. There are ways to check when a page was last update. According to the google cache checker, the page was last cached on 1/31. Which was Monday.

Which means that you're likely wrong.

I hate MCPS comms but I think you're off on this one

So MCPS lied to Catilyn Peetz and wouldn't tell her how many people interviewed but had secretly put up that number days before her story?

You're confused about the order. Peetz wrote a story on 1/27:

https://bethesdamagazine.com/bethesda-beat/schools/mcps-superintendent-search-on-schedule-to-conclude-in-february-district-says/

Then MCPS updated their web page on 1/31. That update included additional details and a link to the interview groups. Now can we end this argument and get back to complaining about all the actual problems MCPS is having?

Wrong article. Why did you waste everyone's time posting a January article when she just wrote an article on 2/2. Oh, because you are paid to confuse and distract?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Wow - that seems so soon. I feel like the last time we at least heard names of candidates. This time nada.

Are they getting better at keeping things quiet or will McKnight automatically get the job because they really didn't do a deep search into anyone else?

I wonder that too. Everything is behind the closed doors now. No transparency at all.

That’s Brenda Wolff and it’s intentional. We should expect better. The process has clearly been orchestrated to anoint McKnight. Regardless of your feelings about her, people should be very concerned about the lack of an open and transparent process.

I don't think we heard the names of several candidates under consideration during past superintendent searches. We did hear one time about a preferred candidate who then pulled himself from consideration.

During prior searches there was at least clearly communicated timelines and processes.

Seems to me the process has been the same as the last few searches; they're even using the same search firm they always have. This timeline has been on their website for months: https://www.montgomeryschoolsmd.org/boe/superintendent-search/
I think this is standard operating procedure for MCPS.

Same process? Then name the parents that were secretly allowed to interview the candidates? In the past, those groups were known. This time? Not so much.

This list has been posted on the page linked above:

https://www.montgomeryschoolsmd.org/uploadedFiles/boe/superintendent-search/Web%20Panel%20Members%20.pdf

Today.
You meant to say the list has been posted today because it wasn't there earlier this week.
Good work staff, refusing to tell reporters what is going on then quietly posting information and leaking it on an anonymous chat room. Classy.

Sorry to disappoint you, but I don't work for MPCS. I'm just a parent who was on their web site the other day and saw the link about the interview committee. It was probably Monday or Tuesday this week that I saw it there and clicked on it.

It wasn't there then. Your fake parent comment isn't cutting it. Time to clock out for the day.

NP. There are ways to check when a page was last update. According to the google cache checker, the page was last cached on 1/31. Which was Monday.

Which means that you're likely wrong.

I hate MCPS comms but I think you're off on this one

So MCPS lied to Catilyn Peetz and wouldn't tell her how many people interviewed but had secretly put up that number days before her story?

You're confused about the order. Peetz wrote a story on 1/27:

https://bethesdamagazine.com/bethesda-beat/schools/mcps-superintendent-search-on-schedule-to-conclude-in-february-district-says/

Then MCPS updated their web page on 1/31. That update included additional details and a link to the interview groups. Now can we end this argument and get back to complaining about all the actual problems MCPS is having?

Wrong article. Why did you waste everyone's time posting a January article when she just wrote an article on 2/2. Oh, because you are paid to confuse and distract?

What about this article is the source of your agitation?

https://bethesdamagazine.com/bethesda-beat/schools/school-board-scheduled-to-name-next-mcps-superintendent-on-tuesday/

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Wow - that seems so soon. I feel like the last time we at least heard names of candidates. This time nada.

Are they getting better at keeping things quiet or will McKnight automatically get the job because they really didn't do a deep search into anyone else?

I wonder that too. Everything is behind the closed doors now. No transparency at all.

That’s Brenda Wolff and it’s intentional. We should expect better. The process has clearly been orchestrated to anoint McKnight. Regardless of your feelings about her, people should be very concerned about the lack of an open and transparent process.

I don't think we heard the names of several candidates under consideration during past superintendent searches. We did hear one time about a preferred candidate who then pulled himself from consideration.

During prior searches there was at least clearly communicated timelines and processes.

Seems to me the process has been the same as the last few searches; they're even using the same search firm they always have. This timeline has been on their website for months: https://www.montgomeryschoolsmd.org/boe/superintendent-search/
I think this is standard operating procedure for MCPS.

Same process? Then name the parents that were secretly allowed to interview the candidates? In the past, those groups were known. This time? Not so much.

This list has been posted on the page linked above:

https://www.montgomeryschoolsmd.org/uploadedFiles/boe/superintendent-search/Web%20Panel%20Members%20.pdf

Today.
You meant to say the list has been posted today because it wasn't there earlier this week.
Good work staff, refusing to tell reporters what is going on then quietly posting information and leaking it on an anonymous chat room. Classy.

Sorry to disappoint you, but I don't work for MPCS. I'm just a parent who was on their web site the other day and saw the link about the interview committee. It was probably Monday or Tuesday this week that I saw it there and clicked on it.

It wasn't there then. Your fake parent comment isn't cutting it. Time to clock out for the day.

NP. There are ways to check when a page was last update. According to the google cache checker, the page was last cached on 1/31. Which was Monday.

Which means that you're likely wrong.

I hate MCPS comms but I think you're off on this one

So MCPS lied to Catilyn Peetz and wouldn't tell her how many people interviewed but had secretly put up that number days before her story?

You're confused about the order. Peetz wrote a story on 1/27:

https://bethesdamagazine.com/bethesda-beat/schools/mcps-superintendent-search-on-schedule-to-conclude-in-february-district-says/

Then MCPS updated their web page on 1/31. That update included additional details and a link to the interview groups. Now can we end this argument and get back to complaining about all the actual problems MCPS is having?

Wrong article. Why did you waste everyone's time posting a January article when she just wrote an article on 2/2. Oh, because you are paid to confuse and distract?

What about this article is the source of your agitation?

https://bethesdamagazine.com/bethesda-beat/schools/school-board-scheduled-to-name-next-mcps-superintendent-on-tuesday/

Try reading.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Wow - that seems so soon. I feel like the last time we at least heard names of candidates. This time nada.

Are they getting better at keeping things quiet or will McKnight automatically get the job because they really didn't do a deep search into anyone else?

I wonder that too. Everything is behind the closed doors now. No transparency at all.

That’s Brenda Wolff and it’s intentional. We should expect better. The process has clearly been orchestrated to anoint McKnight. Regardless of your feelings about her, people should be very concerned about the lack of an open and transparent process.

I don't think we heard the names of several candidates under consideration during past superintendent searches. We did hear one time about a preferred candidate who then pulled himself from consideration.

During prior searches there was at least clearly communicated timelines and processes.

Seems to me the process has been the same as the last few searches; they're even using the same search firm they always have. This timeline has been on their website for months: https://www.montgomeryschoolsmd.org/boe/superintendent-search/
I think this is standard operating procedure for MCPS.

Same process? Then name the parents that were secretly allowed to interview the candidates? In the past, those groups were known. This time? Not so much.

This list has been posted on the page linked above:

https://www.montgomeryschoolsmd.org/uploadedFiles/boe/superintendent-search/Web%20Panel%20Members%20.pdf

Today.
You meant to say the list has been posted today because it wasn't there earlier this week.
Good work staff, refusing to tell reporters what is going on then quietly posting information and leaking it on an anonymous chat room. Classy.

Sorry to disappoint you, but I don't work for MPCS. I'm just a parent who was on their web site the other day and saw the link about the interview committee. It was probably Monday or Tuesday this week that I saw it there and clicked on it.

It wasn't there then. Your fake parent comment isn't cutting it. Time to clock out for the day.

NP. There are ways to check when a page was last update. According to the google cache checker, the page was last cached on 1/31. Which was Monday.

Which means that you're likely wrong.

I hate MCPS comms but I think you're off on this one

So MCPS lied to Catilyn Peetz and wouldn't tell her how many people interviewed but had secretly put up that number days before her story?

Did you even click on the document that MCPS posted? It doesn't 'secretly put the number of people interviewed." It lists what community groups were involved in the process, not the candidates for the position.

You sound like a nut.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't work at central office but have a friend who does and she says McKnight is toxic and vindictive. She plays favorites and is driving away some competent people who don't buy into her cult of personality. Believe me, parents aren't the only people who have noticed how much of the communication coming out of MCPS highlights how Monifa did this, or Monifa did that, instead of highlighting the successes of our kids, teachers, and administrators.

LOL! "Friend" of an anonymous message board mom.

Major credibility fail.

She's like the Stalin of MCPS!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Wow - that seems so soon. I feel like the last time we at least heard names of candidates. This time nada.

Are they getting better at keeping things quiet or will McKnight automatically get the job because they really didn't do a deep search into anyone else?

I wonder that too. Everything is behind the closed doors now. No transparency at all.

That’s Brenda Wolff and it’s intentional. We should expect better. The process has clearly been orchestrated to anoint McKnight. Regardless of your feelings about her, people should be very concerned about the lack of an open and transparent process.

I don't think we heard the names of several candidates under consideration during past superintendent searches. We did hear one time about a preferred candidate who then pulled himself from consideration.

During prior searches there was at least clearly communicated timelines and processes.

Seems to me the process has been the same as the last few searches; they're even using the same search firm they always have. This timeline has been on their website for months: https://www.montgomeryschoolsmd.org/boe/superintendent-search/
I think this is standard operating procedure for MCPS.

Same process? Then name the parents that were secretly allowed to interview the candidates? In the past, those groups were known. This time? Not so much.

This list has been posted on the page linked above:

https://www.montgomeryschoolsmd.org/uploadedFiles/boe/superintendent-search/Web%20Panel%20Members%20.pdf

Today.
You meant to say the list has been posted today because it wasn't there earlier this week.
Good work staff, refusing to tell reporters what is going on then quietly posting information and leaking it on an anonymous chat room. Classy.

Sorry to disappoint you, but I don't work for MPCS. I'm just a parent who was on their web site the other day and saw the link about the interview committee. It was probably Monday or Tuesday this week that I saw it there and clicked on it.

It wasn't there then. Your fake parent comment isn't cutting it. Time to clock out for the day.

NP. There are ways to check when a page was last update. According to the google cache checker, the page was last cached on 1/31. Which was Monday.

Which means that you're likely wrong.

I hate MCPS comms but I think you're off on this one

So MCPS lied to Catilyn Peetz and wouldn't tell her how many people interviewed but had secretly put up that number days before her story?

You're confused about the order. Peetz wrote a story on 1/27:

https://bethesdamagazine.com/bethesda-beat/schools/mcps-superintendent-search-on-schedule-to-conclude-in-february-district-says/

Then MCPS updated their web page on 1/31. That update included additional details and a link to the interview groups. Now can we end this argument and get back to complaining about all the actual problems MCPS is having?

Wrong article. Why did you waste everyone's time posting a January article when she just wrote an article on 2/2. Oh, because you are paid to confuse and distract?

That would be my guess. Seems like these right-wing groups are targeting schools boards pretty heavily these days.

[Anonymous]

Interesting take on the search process: https://www.washingtonpost.com/education/2022/02/03/montgomery-county-schools-superintendent/