Anonymous wrote:I went to an open house today at SSMA only to find out there was no open house. The receptionist claimed it wasn't on their website; another parent showed her otherwise. The real kicker: I received an email confirmation of my RSVP for the open house.

Shit show, indeed.

Wow, that is very sad! They are going to have a heck of a time filling their seats this next year. Although I'm sure they will, after running through most of the waitlist.

I went to an open house today at SSMA only to find out there was no open house. The receptionist claimed it wasn't on their website; another parent showed her otherwise. The real kicker: I received an email confirmation of my RSVP for the open house.

Shit show, indeed.

Anonymous wrote:The latest annual report was just posted on the dcpcsb site. It states teacher attrition of 66% (and doesn't list the PhD)

https://dcpcsb.egnyte.com/dl/Q08vUxXbOm

And multiple things mentioned in the report did not happen in the 2017-2018 school year either, such as the Chat and Chews, ten Montessori learning events, etc.

The latest annual report was just posted on the dcpcsb site. It states teacher attrition of 66% (and doesn't list the PhD)

https://dcpcsb.egnyte.com/dl/Q08vUxXbOm

How did the Board meeting go?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So how did the letter delivery go? Did a critical mass of families sign it?

My understanding is that it is intended to be presented at tomorrow's Board meeting. I've heard about 25% of families signed it.

Good luck today, SSMA families. I hope the board is willing to listen to the school community today.

Anonymous wrote:So how did the letter delivery go? Did a critical mass of families sign it?

My understanding is that it is intended to be presented at tomorrow's Board meeting. I've heard about 25% of families signed it.

So how did the letter delivery go? Did a critical mass of families sign it?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Looks like parents are sending an open letter to the Dr. R and the Board about all the issues.

I would love to see it if someone is willing to post it.

https://docs.google.com/forms/d/e/1FAIpQLSfLU9b0unnAkPisk9zyY7nnHyWAAI4tNQZSGFNWQCmVsy0hIw/viewform

OMG... this is outrageous! SSMA closed a room with significant HVAC problems, the ED doesn’t talk to certain parents enough and teacher turnover is lower than DC average.

Do you have stats on DC average turnover? I'm genuinely curious. I am not sure where to search for something like that.

Last year SSMA had 10 classrooms. 5 of those lead guides did not return this year. 50% turnover does not seem normal...or if it is, shouldn't SSMA strive for something above average if it's attempting to become a Tier 1 school?

Charter schools have to report teacher turnover as part of their annual reports. There is a lag, however, so 17-18 won't be posted yet. I've never seen an average produced, but you can look up a few comparative schools and see for yourself how SSMA compares. https://www.dcpcsb.org/report/evaluating/charter-school-annual-reports

Thank you! That is legitimately helpful as I didn't realize that was a standard metric. Obviously a year behind since these are all 16-17. Just did a really quick check of schools that are either comparable (Lee and LAMB) or also in the neighborhood or nearby (Stokes, ITS, Creative Minds):

SSMA - 97.5% (this is literally what is printed in the annual report, although I don't think it can be accurate)
Lee - 17%
LAMB - 18%
ITS - 17.6%
Stokes - 15%
Creative Minds - 28%

The SBOE produces a report that includes the rates for 2015-2018 with a three-year average. See https://sboe.dc.gov/sites/default/files/dc/sites/sboe/publication/attachments/SBOE%20Teacher%20Turnover%20Report%20-%20FINAL.pdf.

The 97.5% in the annual report for SSMA seems to be an error. A known error in some of the charter school annual reports is that the schools reported retention instead of attrition (turnover). SSMA seems to have been one of them. The SBOE reports shows 3% leaving SSMA from 2017 to 2018. If 97.5% is the retention rate, then 2.5% rounded up to 3% would be the turnover rate. Earlier years were much higher.

Anonymous wrote:What’s the deal with the Obama room? Is it the only gym/auditorium type room the school has? Because, if so, I can understand the focus on it.

It is. It’s the big multipurpose room at the school.

What’s the deal with the Obama room? Is it the only gym/auditorium type room the school has? Because, if so, I can understand the focus on it.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:That letter seems way too formal. It's the kind of thing a snippy board could just respond to with similarly high-minded and meaningless language and call it a day.

I get that the parents may have to go this way at first, but at a certain point you have to get right to "do a better job of retaining your teachers so this isn't just fake Montessori, fix your busted facilities, and keep parents involved and informed about important stuff, or everyone is going to start ditching you."

I think it's written in a formal way, because the Board has been previous critical of the "way" parents were voicing concerns. Parents tried that approach and were told they were rude, being inappropriate, and completely off base.

PP here--I get it now. This board sounds like a real catch. Yeesh.

They are. They continue to defend the administration and have gone so far as threaten to disband the Community Association.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:That letter seems way too formal. It's the kind of thing a snippy board could just respond to with similarly high-minded and meaningless language and call it a day.

I get that the parents may have to go this way at first, but at a certain point you have to get right to "do a better job of retaining your teachers so this isn't just fake Montessori, fix your busted facilities, and keep parents involved and informed about important stuff, or everyone is going to start ditching you."

I think it's written in a formal way, because the Board has been previous critical of the "way" parents were voicing concerns. Parents tried that approach and were told they were rude, being inappropriate, and completely off base.

PP here--I get it now. This board sounds like a real catch. Yeesh.