Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am really concerned about the regional model because it seems so rushed. What makes them think they can hire qualified teachers for all these specialties? They already cannot hire qualified computer science or language teachers. And when they tried to expand the IB program it was an utter failure because it turns out you can’t snap your fingers and have qualified IB teachers. They r got a “if you build it, they will come” attitude that just seems to me to be magical thinking. The races of the kids involved have no bearing on my concern - I just think this whole thing seems like something dreamed up for an ed PhD thesis without any concept of how it will work in practice or whether it will improve outcomes.

After 15 years in McPS, my conclusion is that what the system needs is (in this order): 1) smaller class sizes especially for classes teaching reading and writing; 2) the best teachers money, and respect (which is sometimes worth more than money) will buy; 3) adequate planning and grading time for teachers — I would trade off instructional time for this!!!!; 4) consistent curriculum that doesn’t chase trends; 5) increased in school security for MS and HS so disruptive kids are in the halls or bathrooms; and 6) physical plant improvements so kids aren’t boiling/freezing/dodging rats.

We are wasting time and money chasing dumb educational trends instead of fixing what’s broken.

Bolded is what also got teachers union to question the regional model proposal as well. But BOE blew them off too.

Taylor seems to think all schools already have qualified teachers. The model is based on assumptions and I suspect likely to fail if implemented in its current iteration. Of course all this vote did was dismantle the DCC and NEC with a plan to create some sort of to be developed regional model. I'm not really sure why Wolff and Montoya are so convinced that eliminating the consortiums is good for the families they claim to care about.

There's a simple and obvious solution: create different pay scales for the positions most challenging to fill.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am really concerned about the regional model because it seems so rushed. What makes them think they can hire qualified teachers for all these specialties? They already cannot hire qualified computer science or language teachers. And when they tried to expand the IB program it was an utter failure because it turns out you can’t snap your fingers and have qualified IB teachers. They r got a “if you build it, they will come” attitude that just seems to me to be magical thinking. The races of the kids involved have no bearing on my concern - I just think this whole thing seems like something dreamed up for an ed PhD thesis without any concept of how it will work in practice or whether it will improve outcomes.

After 15 years in McPS, my conclusion is that what the system needs is (in this order): 1) smaller class sizes especially for classes teaching reading and writing; 2) the best teachers money, and respect (which is sometimes worth more than money) will buy; 3) adequate planning and grading time for teachers — I would trade off instructional time for this!!!!; 4) consistent curriculum that doesn’t chase trends; 5) increased in school security for MS and HS so disruptive kids are in the halls or bathrooms; and 6) physical plant improvements so kids aren’t boiling/freezing/dodging rats.

We are wasting time and money chasing dumb educational trends instead of fixing what’s broken.

Bolded is what also got teachers union to question the regional model proposal as well. But BOE blew them off too.

Taylor seems to think all schools already have qualified teachers. The model is based on assumptions and I suspect likely to fail if implemented in its current iteration. Of course all this vote did was dismantle the DCC and NEC with a plan to create some sort of to be developed regional model. I'm not really sure why Wolff and Montoya are so convinced that eliminating the consortiums is good for the families they claim to care about.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am really concerned about the regional model because it seems so rushed. What makes them think they can hire qualified teachers for all these specialties? They already cannot hire qualified computer science or language teachers. And when they tried to expand the IB program it was an utter failure because it turns out you can’t snap your fingers and have qualified IB teachers. They r got a “if you build it, they will come” attitude that just seems to me to be magical thinking. The races of the kids involved have no bearing on my concern - I just think this whole thing seems like something dreamed up for an ed PhD thesis without any concept of how it will work in practice or whether it will improve outcomes.

After 15 years in McPS, my conclusion is that what the system needs is (in this order): 1) smaller class sizes especially for classes teaching reading and writing; 2) the best teachers money, and respect (which is sometimes worth more than money) will buy; 3) adequate planning and grading time for teachers — I would trade off instructional time for this!!!!; 4) consistent curriculum that doesn’t chase trends; 5) increased in school security for MS and HS so disruptive kids are in the halls or bathrooms; and 6) physical plant improvements so kids aren’t boiling/freezing/dodging rats.

We are wasting time and money chasing dumb educational trends instead of fixing what’s broken.

Bolded is what also got teachers union to question the regional model proposal as well. But BOE blew them off too.

Taylor seems to think all schools already have qualified teachers. The model is based on assumptions and I suspect likely to fail if implemented in its current iteration. Of course all this vote did was dismantle the DCC and NEC with a plan to create some sort of to be developed regional model. I'm not really sure why Wolff and Montoya are so convinced that eliminating the consortiums is good for the families they claim to care about.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't like the behaviors you described, but I am more concerned about the BOE being incompetent and refusing to ask tough questions of the Superintendent. Ultimately I think this stems from their low stipends and lack of independent staff. I'll happily vote for alternative candidates that aren't hateful, especially if they support more physical books and learning with pencil and paper. But honestly I don't think much will change until the BOE has more resources to provide actual oversight of the Superintendent.

More money would not help. She works for Mcps.

I have never seen or heard that Montoya works for MCPS. Where are you getting this from?

She gets paid a small salary and excellent benefits from MCPS.


She has unreflected racial beliefs and that is a problem for an elected leader. I heard her hot mic comments last night. She appears bigoted against Asian American communities in my opinion. She does not know history.

+1 Nothing else is there to see.

Can you say more? I get people don’t like being called racist, but what did she say that shows she is bigoted against Asian people?

She gave information on the demographics of the current magnets and said a vote to preserve them was racist, not because she thinks there should be fewer Asians at them but because she thinks there should be more seats overall so that more kids have access. Totally fair to be skeptical that will work, but I am not understanding the overwhelming response that she was being racist.

There were a lot of Asian American community members in the audience. Montoya had a hot mic moment at the end of the vote on the resolution during which she was talking to Branda Wolff, identifying audience members as being racist when they clapped for Julie Yang's no vote and asked to be spoken to in Chinese after Grace Rivera-Oven spoke to constituents in Spanish.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't like the behaviors you described, but I am more concerned about the BOE being incompetent and refusing to ask tough questions of the Superintendent. Ultimately I think this stems from their low stipends and lack of independent staff. I'll happily vote for alternative candidates that aren't hateful, especially if they support more physical books and learning with pencil and paper. But honestly I don't think much will change until the BOE has more resources to provide actual oversight of the Superintendent.

More money would not help. She works for Mcps.

I have never seen or heard that Montoya works for MCPS. Where are you getting this from?

She gets paid a small salary and excellent benefits from MCPS.


She has unreflected racial beliefs and that is a problem for an elected leader. I heard her hot mic comments last night. She appears bigoted against Asian American communities in my opinion. She does not know history.

+1 Nothing else is there to see.

Can you say more? I get people don’t like being called racist, but what did she say that shows she is bigoted against Asian people?

She gave information on the demographics of the current magnets and said a vote to preserve them was racist, not because she thinks there should be fewer Asians at them but because she thinks there should be more seats overall so that more kids have access. Totally fair to be skeptical that will work, but I am not understanding the overwhelming response that she was being racist.

I think the argument is that it is racist to send rich white and asian kids to school with hispanic kids.

Her kids are in NCC, and pipeline to BCC.. her kids will go to school with the rich kids... she has no clue whats going on down the road from her.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am really concerned about the regional model because it seems so rushed. What makes them think they can hire qualified teachers for all these specialties? They already cannot hire qualified computer science or language teachers. And when they tried to expand the IB program it was an utter failure because it turns out you can’t snap your fingers and have qualified IB teachers. They r got a “if you build it, they will come” attitude that just seems to me to be magical thinking. The races of the kids involved have no bearing on my concern - I just think this whole thing seems like something dreamed up for an ed PhD thesis without any concept of how it will work in practice or whether it will improve outcomes.

After 15 years in McPS, my conclusion is that what the system needs is (in this order): 1) smaller class sizes especially for classes teaching reading and writing; 2) the best teachers money, and respect (which is sometimes worth more than money) will buy; 3) adequate planning and grading time for teachers — I would trade off instructional time for this!!!!; 4) consistent curriculum that doesn’t chase trends; 5) increased in school security for MS and HS so disruptive kids are in the halls or bathrooms; and 6) physical plant improvements so kids aren’t boiling/freezing/dodging rats.

We are wasting time and money chasing dumb educational trends instead of fixing what’s broken.

Bolded is what also got teachers union to question the regional model proposal as well. But BOE blew them off too.

Taylor seems to think all schools already have qualified teachers. The model is based on assumptions and I suspect likely to fail if implemented in its current iteration. Of course all this vote did was dismantle the DCC and NEC with a plan to create some sort of to be developed regional model. I'm not really sure why Wolff and Montoya are so convinced that eliminating the consortiums is good for the families they claim to care about.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't like the behaviors you described, but I am more concerned about the BOE being incompetent and refusing to ask tough questions of the Superintendent. Ultimately I think this stems from their low stipends and lack of independent staff. I'll happily vote for alternative candidates that aren't hateful, especially if they support more physical books and learning with pencil and paper. But honestly I don't think much will change until the BOE has more resources to provide actual oversight of the Superintendent.

More money would not help. She works for Mcps.

I have never seen or heard that Montoya works for MCPS. Where are you getting this from?

She gets paid a small salary and excellent benefits from MCPS.


She has unreflected racial beliefs and that is a problem for an elected leader. I heard her hot mic comments last night. She appears bigoted against Asian American communities in my opinion. She does not know history.

+1 Nothing else is there to see.

Can you say more? I get people don’t like being called racist, but what did she say that shows she is bigoted against Asian people?

She gave information on the demographics of the current magnets and said a vote to preserve them was racist, not because she thinks there should be fewer Asians at them but because she thinks there should be more seats overall so that more kids have access. Totally fair to be skeptical that will work, but I am not understanding the overwhelming response that she was being racist.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am really concerned about the regional model because it seems so rushed. What makes them think they can hire qualified teachers for all these specialties? They already cannot hire qualified computer science or language teachers. And when they tried to expand the IB program it was an utter failure because it turns out you can’t snap your fingers and have qualified IB teachers. They r got a “if you build it, they will come” attitude that just seems to me to be magical thinking. The races of the kids involved have no bearing on my concern - I just think this whole thing seems like something dreamed up for an ed PhD thesis without any concept of how it will work in practice or whether it will improve outcomes.

After 15 years in McPS, my conclusion is that what the system needs is (in this order): 1) smaller class sizes especially for classes teaching reading and writing; 2) the best teachers money, and respect (which is sometimes worth more than money) will buy; 3) adequate planning and grading time for teachers — I would trade off instructional time for this!!!!; 4) consistent curriculum that doesn’t chase trends; 5) increased in school security for MS and HS so disruptive kids are in the halls or bathrooms; and 6) physical plant improvements so kids aren’t boiling/freezing/dodging rats.

We are wasting time and money chasing dumb educational trends instead of fixing what’s broken.

Bolded is what also got teachers union to question the regional model proposal as well. But BOE blew them off too.

Anonymous wrote:I watched the video. As an attorney, she seems to have a misunderstanding the Constitution, which provides equal protection for individuals, not groups. Every argument about Asians being "overrepresented" relative to the general population falls in the same trap. By their logic, the NFL must be discriminating against Asian Americans. As Thomas Sowell explained in his books, disparity does not automatically mean discrimination. There can be other factors. e.g. Studies show that Asian students spent 2 to 3 times of hours on academic work, compared with black and hispanic students. Then what's surprising about Asian students doing better academically?

Anonymous wrote:Her rhetoric towards constituents is unhinged, unprofessional and divisive. She owes the community an apology and the promise that she will do better.

2:05:00- “You can tell them to shut up” speaking about constituents.

Then later she talks about the ugly words thrown towards her. Ha!

2:06:20 “ So I want to be clear to this community and to all of my colleagues that a vote against this model is a vote to perpetuate the racist access to these programs that has been going on for some time.”

No. This is such a lazy and harmful comment. I haven’t met a person in opposition to increased access to these programs. You could have pushed this out a year or two to ensure the execution doesn’t further harm students in lower social economic areas. Framing in this way is reckless!

2:29:23 “That’s the racism” in response to those audience members who applauded Julie Yang’s vote against.

Just gross and shortsighted.

Let’s vote this person out.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't like the behaviors you described, but I am more concerned about the BOE being incompetent and refusing to ask tough questions of the Superintendent. Ultimately I think this stems from their low stipends and lack of independent staff. I'll happily vote for alternative candidates that aren't hateful, especially if they support more physical books and learning with pencil and paper. But honestly I don't think much will change until the BOE has more resources to provide actual oversight of the Superintendent.

More money would not help. She works for Mcps.

I have never seen or heard that Montoya works for MCPS. Where are you getting this from?

She gets paid a small salary and excellent benefits from MCPS.


She has unreflected racial beliefs and that is a problem for an elected leader. I heard her hot mic comments last night. She appears bigoted against Asian American communities in my opinion. She does not know history.

+1 Nothing else is there to see.

Can you say more? I get people don’t like being called racist, but what did she say that shows she is bigoted against Asian people?

She gave information on the demographics of the current magnets and said a vote to preserve them was racist, not because she thinks there should be fewer Asians at them but because she thinks there should be more seats overall so that more kids have access. Totally fair to be skeptical that will work, but I am not understanding the overwhelming response that she was being racist.

Anonymous wrote:I am really concerned about the regional model because it seems so rushed. What makes them think they can hire qualified teachers for all these specialties? They already cannot hire qualified computer science or language teachers. And when they tried to expand the IB program it was an utter failure because it turns out you can’t snap your fingers and have qualified IB teachers. They r got a “if you build it, they will come” attitude that just seems to me to be magical thinking. The races of the kids involved have no bearing on my concern - I just think this whole thing seems like something dreamed up for an ed PhD thesis without any concept of how it will work in practice or whether it will improve outcomes.

After 15 years in McPS, my conclusion is that what the system needs is (in this order): 1) smaller class sizes especially for classes teaching reading and writing; 2) the best teachers money, and respect (which is sometimes worth more than money) will buy; 3) adequate planning and grading time for teachers — I would trade off instructional time for this!!!!; 4) consistent curriculum that doesn’t chase trends; 5) increased in school security for MS and HS so disruptive kids are in the halls or bathrooms; and 6) physical plant improvements so kids aren’t boiling/freezing/dodging rats.

We are wasting time and money chasing dumb educational trends instead of fixing what’s broken.

Anonymous wrote:Her rhetoric towards constituents is unhinged, unprofessional and divisive. She owes the community an apology and the promise that she will do better.

2:05:00- “You can tell them to shut up” speaking about constituents.

Then later she talks about the ugly words thrown towards her. Ha!

2:06:20 “ So I want to be clear to this community and to all of my colleagues that a vote against this model is a vote to perpetuate the racist access to these programs that has been going on for some time.”

No. This is such a lazy and harmful comment. I haven’t met a person in opposition to increased access to these programs. You could have pushed this out a year or two to ensure the execution doesn’t further harm students in lower social economic areas. Framing in this way is reckless!

2:29:23 “That’s the racism” in response to those audience members who applauded Julie Yang’s vote against.

Just gross and shortsighted.

Let’s vote this person out.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't like the behaviors you described, but I am more concerned about the BOE being incompetent and refusing to ask tough questions of the Superintendent. Ultimately I think this stems from their low stipends and lack of independent staff. I'll happily vote for alternative candidates that aren't hateful, especially if they support more physical books and learning with pencil and paper. But honestly I don't think much will change until the BOE has more resources to provide actual oversight of the Superintendent.

More money would not help. She works for Mcps.

I have never seen or heard that Montoya works for MCPS. Where are you getting this from?

She gets paid a small salary and excellent benefits from MCPS.


She has unreflected racial beliefs and that is a problem for an elected leader. I heard her hot mic comments last night. She appears bigoted against Asian American communities in my opinion. She does not know history.

+1 Nothing else is there to see.

Anonymous wrote:I am really concerned about the regional model because it seems so rushed. What makes them think they can hire qualified teachers for all these specialties? They already cannot hire qualified computer science or language teachers. And when they tried to expand the IB program it was an utter failure because it turns out you can’t snap your fingers and have qualified IB teachers. They r got a “if you build it, they will come” attitude that just seems to me to be magical thinking. The races of the kids involved have no bearing on my concern - I just think this whole thing seems like something dreamed up for an ed PhD thesis without any concept of how it will work in practice or whether it will improve outcomes.

After 15 years in McPS, my conclusion is that what the system needs is (in this order): 1) smaller class sizes especially for classes teaching reading and writing; 2) the best teachers money, and respect (which is sometimes worth more than money) will buy; 3) adequate planning and grading time for teachers — I would trade off instructional time for this!!!!; 4) consistent curriculum that doesn’t chase trends; 5) increased in school security for MS and HS so disruptive kids are in the halls or bathrooms; and 6) physical plant improvements so kids aren’t boiling/freezing/dodging rats.

We are wasting time and money chasing dumb educational trends instead of fixing what’s broken.