APE and tech (APS)

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Of all the things I care about, elementary school iPad usage is the least of my concerns. If APE talked to their teachers and principals, they would find that even in upper elem, they aren’t even used that much. It’s mostly used for differentiation, so that teachers can put the class on Lexia or Dreambox so that they can do small group work. Anything more will cost money for more teachers to supervise, and we all know what’s going on with the budget. And yes, many standardized tests are administered electronically. You will have to go to Richmond for that.

So tired of APE taking all the oxygen out of the room, so we can’t talk about more salient issues affecting APS. ArlNow is now their mouthpiece.

APS pays teachers less than relative to other districts, we have mainstreamed kids with challenges, and ramped up testing. There will be times when the teacher needs to focus on on a small group, often times this will consume a large portion of the day, so what would the kids do before iPads? They would watch a movie. Or worksheets. This may or may not be better, but the real problem is the classes are too large now, and there’s too much differentiation effort to allow them to actually teach the class as one

You think a kindergarten teacher will put most of their class on an iPad so they can focus on a small group for a large portion of the day??? I don't think so. That's not how kindergarten kids work. Their attention spans don't last long at all.

They’re called digital pacifiers for a reason.

+1 and when you try to take them away from some kids they have a major meltdown

Like the meltdown APE is having over tech, lol

No. Not everything they do is a meltdown. Their behavior during Covid was bad. This is productive

It’s distracting. Why aren’t they lobbying their buddy, Youngkin, to not reduce APS funding? They are a lobbying org that theoretically wants to support our kids.

Good question. APE never stands up for APS with their bud Youngkin.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think it’s significant that APE and AEA are in agreement with this. I support it as well as APS staff/parent

I don't take educational "recommendations" from a lobbying group that twists the "science" to fit its agenda. No thanks.

+1

I don’t trust stealth Republicans no matter what they might say to embed themselves in the community.

So is the head of the teachers' union a "stealth republican" then? Truly, there is no limit to APE's insidious, corrupting influence!

The issue isn’t that they think iPads in k-2 are bad; everyone agrees that they’re not ideal. The issue is that they are shifting the conversation to it. I agree that K-2 shouldn’t spend much time on iPads, but given they don’t actually spend a lot of time on them (and they need them for state testing), it’s a low-priority “issue”. There are many more important issues they should be addressing.

Their goal is to scream about APS and pretend like they’re building community consensus. They don’t actually address the hard issues.

Huh? Did you read the article? APE brought it up at March budget meeting as a way to save money. 1:1 devices in K-2 is something that could be cut that wouldn't hurt K-2 education while making room in the APS budget. As far as I know addressing the budget is a super important issue right now.

I'm not an APE supporter, but rejecting this proposal because it is also supported by APE is stupid.

So they’re arguing over a tiny amount vs addressing a huge cut in the budget by Youngkin.

It’s a distraction.

They know what they are doing, they are all lobbyists and PR. They could pressure Youngkin for funds if they wanted to. They don’t.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think it’s significant that APE and AEA are in agreement with this. I support it as well as APS staff/parent

I don't take educational "recommendations" from a lobbying group that twists the "science" to fit its agenda. No thanks.

+1

I don’t trust stealth Republicans no matter what they might say to embed themselves in the community.

So is the head of the teachers' union a "stealth republican" then? Truly, there is no limit to APE's insidious, corrupting influence!

The issue isn’t that they think iPads in k-2 are bad; everyone agrees that they’re not ideal. The issue is that they are shifting the conversation to it. I agree that K-2 shouldn’t spend much time on iPads, but given they don’t actually spend a lot of time on them (and they need them for state testing), it’s a low-priority “issue”. There are many more important issues they should be addressing.

Their goal is to scream about APS and pretend like they’re building community consensus. They don’t actually address the hard issues.

Huh? Did you read the article? APE brought it up at March budget meeting as a way to save money. 1:1 devices in K-2 is something that could be cut that wouldn't hurt K-2 education while making room in the APS budget. As far as I know addressing the budget is a super important issue right now.

I'm not an APE supporter, but rejecting this proposal because it is also supported by APE is stupid.

THIS!!!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The iPads in APS are the only way my 1st and 4th grade gifted children are being challenged with differentiated work. If the iPads go, we need an actual gifted program or kids need to be grouped with academic peers. They also need real grades. What’s the point in working hard if the best mark you can get is “meets”.

Hmm. Learning, perhaps?

The problem is that many kids can "meet" 99% of grade level standards before the year even starts. So the report card doesn't reflect learning OR effort. At least with grades you could see that kids were putting in effort to earn the grade by completing assignments.

What?
How does your comment relate to the point about gifted differentiation and the point of working hard only to get a "meets?"

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think it’s significant that APE and AEA are in agreement with this. I support it as well as APS staff/parent

I don't take educational "recommendations" from a lobbying group that twists the "science" to fit its agenda. No thanks.

+1

I don’t trust stealth Republicans no matter what they might say to embed themselves in the community.

So is the head of the teachers' union a "stealth republican" then? Truly, there is no limit to APE's insidious, corrupting influence!

The issue isn’t that they think iPads in k-2 are bad; everyone agrees that they’re not ideal. The issue is that they are shifting the conversation to it. I agree that K-2 shouldn’t spend much time on iPads, but given they don’t actually spend a lot of time on them (and they need them for state testing), it’s a low-priority “issue”. There are many more important issues they should be addressing.

Their goal is to scream about APS and pretend like they’re building community consensus. They don’t actually address the hard issues.

Huh? Did you read the article? APE brought it up at March budget meeting as a way to save money. 1:1 devices in K-2 is something that could be cut that wouldn't hurt K-2 education while making room in the APS budget. As far as I know addressing the budget is a super important issue right now.

I'm not an APE supporter, but rejecting this proposal because it is also supported by APE is stupid.

So they’re arguing over a tiny amount vs addressing a huge cut in the budget by Youngkin.

It’s a distraction.

They have talked about. And told people to email about it. Besides the General
Assembly rejected the Youngkin budget and passed on with higher funding.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think it’s significant that APE and AEA are in agreement with this. I support it as well as APS staff/parent

I don't take educational "recommendations" from a lobbying group that twists the "science" to fit its agenda. No thanks.

+1

I don’t trust stealth Republicans no matter what they might say to embed themselves in the community.

So is the head of the teachers' union a "stealth republican" then? Truly, there is no limit to APE's insidious, corrupting influence!

The issue isn’t that they think iPads in k-2 are bad; everyone agrees that they’re not ideal. The issue is that they are shifting the conversation to it. I agree that K-2 shouldn’t spend much time on iPads, but given they don’t actually spend a lot of time on them (and they need them for state testing), it’s a low-priority “issue”. There are many more important issues they should be addressing.

Their goal is to scream about APS and pretend like they’re building community consensus. They don’t actually address the hard issues.

Huh? Did you read the article? APE brought it up at March budget meeting as a way to save money. 1:1 devices in K-2 is something that could be cut that wouldn't hurt K-2 education while making room in the APS budget. As far as I know addressing the budget is a super important issue right now.

I'm not an APE supporter, but rejecting this proposal because it is also supported by APE is stupid.

So they’re arguing over a tiny amount vs addressing a huge cut in the budget by Youngkin.

It’s a distraction.

They have talked about. And told people to email about it. Besides the General
Assembly rejected the Youngkin budget and passed on with higher funding.

But not recouping the full cut.

Which newsletter? I scanned through all in 2024 and don’t remember seeing that.

And they want parents to email him? It’s a lobbyist org who only wants to “lobby” when it’s APS, not their buddy Youngkin.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think it’s significant that APE and AEA are in agreement with this. I support it as well as APS staff/parent

I don't take educational "recommendations" from a lobbying group that twists the "science" to fit its agenda. No thanks.

+1

I don’t trust stealth Republicans no matter what they might say to embed themselves in the community.

So is the head of the teachers' union a "stealth republican" then? Truly, there is no limit to APE's insidious, corrupting influence!

The issue isn’t that they think iPads in k-2 are bad; everyone agrees that they’re not ideal. The issue is that they are shifting the conversation to it. I agree that K-2 shouldn’t spend much time on iPads, but given they don’t actually spend a lot of time on them (and they need them for state testing), it’s a low-priority “issue”. There are many more important issues they should be addressing.

Their goal is to scream about APS and pretend like they’re building community consensus. They don’t actually address the hard issues.

Huh? Did you read the article? APE brought it up at March budget meeting as a way to save money. 1:1 devices in K-2 is something that could be cut that wouldn't hurt K-2 education while making room in the APS budget. As far as I know addressing the budget is a super important issue right now.

I'm not an APE supporter, but rejecting this proposal because it is also supported by APE is stupid.

So they’re arguing over a tiny amount vs addressing a huge cut in the budget by Youngkin.

It’s a distraction.

They have talked about. And told people to email about it. Besides the General
Assembly rejected the Youngkin budget and passed on with higher funding.

But not recouping the full cut.

Which newsletter? I scanned through all in 2024 and don’t remember seeing that.

And they want parents to email him? It’s a lobbyist org who only wants to “lobby” when it’s APS, not their buddy Youngkin.

Link to it or it didnt happen. And where is APE's own lobbying of Youngkin?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think it’s significant that APE and AEA are in agreement with this. I support it as well as APS staff/parent

I don't take educational "recommendations" from a lobbying group that twists the "science" to fit its agenda. No thanks.

+1

I don’t trust stealth Republicans no matter what they might say to embed themselves in the community.

So is the head of the teachers' union a "stealth republican" then? Truly, there is no limit to APE's insidious, corrupting influence!

The issue isn’t that they think iPads in k-2 are bad; everyone agrees that they’re not ideal. The issue is that they are shifting the conversation to it. I agree that K-2 shouldn’t spend much time on iPads, but given they don’t actually spend a lot of time on them (and they need them for state testing), it’s a low-priority “issue”. There are many more important issues they should be addressing.

Their goal is to scream about APS and pretend like they’re building community consensus. They don’t actually address the hard issues.

Huh? Did you read the article? APE brought it up at March budget meeting as a way to save money. 1:1 devices in K-2 is something that could be cut that wouldn't hurt K-2 education while making room in the APS budget. As far as I know addressing the budget is a super important issue right now.

I'm not an APE supporter, but rejecting this proposal because it is also supported by APE is stupid.

So they’re arguing over a tiny amount vs addressing a huge cut in the budget by Youngkin.

It’s a distraction.

APS is considering lots of individual small line items to cut, including TJ, the Outdoor Lab, swimming field trips, etc. Those all add up. This was a budget meeting discussing what should be on that list, not a meeting with Youngkin. It was totally appropriate for that conversation. Stop being stupid.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think it’s significant that APE and AEA are in agreement with this. I support it as well as APS staff/parent

I don't take educational "recommendations" from a lobbying group that twists the "science" to fit its agenda. No thanks.

+1

I don’t trust stealth Republicans no matter what they might say to embed themselves in the community.

So is the head of the teachers' union a "stealth republican" then? Truly, there is no limit to APE's insidious, corrupting influence!

The issue isn’t that they think iPads in k-2 are bad; everyone agrees that they’re not ideal. The issue is that they are shifting the conversation to it. I agree that K-2 shouldn’t spend much time on iPads, but given they don’t actually spend a lot of time on them (and they need them for state testing), it’s a low-priority “issue”. There are many more important issues they should be addressing.

Their goal is to scream about APS and pretend like they’re building community consensus. They don’t actually address the hard issues.

Huh? Did you read the article? APE brought it up at March budget meeting as a way to save money. 1:1 devices in K-2 is something that could be cut that wouldn't hurt K-2 education while making room in the APS budget. As far as I know addressing the budget is a super important issue right now.

I'm not an APE supporter, but rejecting this proposal because it is also supported by APE is stupid.

So they’re arguing over a tiny amount vs addressing a huge cut in the budget by Youngkin.

It’s a distraction.

They have talked about. And told people to email about it. Besides the General
Assembly rejected the Youngkin budget and passed on with higher funding.

But not recouping the full cut.

Which newsletter? I scanned through all in 2024 and don’t remember seeing that.

And they want parents to email him? It’s a lobbyist org who only wants to “lobby” when it’s APS, not their buddy Youngkin.

Link to it or it didnt happen. And where is APE's own lobbying of Youngkin?

https://www.arlingtonparentsforeducation.org/newsletter-2024/march-12-2024-newsletter

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think it’s significant that APE and AEA are in agreement with this. I support it as well as APS staff/parent

I don't take educational "recommendations" from a lobbying group that twists the "science" to fit its agenda. No thanks.

+1

I don’t trust stealth Republicans no matter what they might say to embed themselves in the community.

So is the head of the teachers' union a "stealth republican" then? Truly, there is no limit to APE's insidious, corrupting influence!

The issue isn’t that they think iPads in k-2 are bad; everyone agrees that they’re not ideal. The issue is that they are shifting the conversation to it. I agree that K-2 shouldn’t spend much time on iPads, but given they don’t actually spend a lot of time on them (and they need them for state testing), it’s a low-priority “issue”. There are many more important issues they should be addressing.

Their goal is to scream about APS and pretend like they’re building community consensus. They don’t actually address the hard issues.

The teacher page seems to be in
overwhelmingly agreement with APE on this issue.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think it’s significant that APE and AEA are in agreement with this. I support it as well as APS staff/parent

I don't take educational "recommendations" from a lobbying group that twists the "science" to fit its agenda. No thanks.

+1

I don’t trust stealth Republicans no matter what they might say to embed themselves in the community.

So is the head of the teachers' union a "stealth republican" then? Truly, there is no limit to APE's insidious, corrupting influence!

The issue isn’t that they think iPads in k-2 are bad; everyone agrees that they’re not ideal. The issue is that they are shifting the conversation to it. I agree that K-2 shouldn’t spend much time on iPads, but given they don’t actually spend a lot of time on them (and they need them for state testing), it’s a low-priority “issue”. There are many more important issues they should be addressing.

Their goal is to scream about APS and pretend like they’re building community consensus. They don’t actually address the hard issues.

Huh? Did you read the article? APE brought it up at March budget meeting as a way to save money. 1:1 devices in K-2 is something that could be cut that wouldn't hurt K-2 education while making room in the APS budget. As far as I know addressing the budget is a super important issue right now.

I'm not an APE supporter, but rejecting this proposal because it is also supported by APE is stupid.

So they’re arguing over a tiny amount vs addressing a huge cut in the budget by Youngkin.

It’s a distraction.

APS is considering lots of individual small line items to cut, including TJ, the Outdoor Lab, swimming field trips, etc. Those all add up. This was a budget meeting discussing what should be on that list, not a meeting with Youngkin. It was totally appropriate for that conversation. Stop being stupid.

As I understand it, the proposed school board budget for this year doesn’t cut any of those things. They put them all back in.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think it’s significant that APE and AEA are in agreement with this. I support it as well as APS staff/parent

I don't take educational "recommendations" from a lobbying group that twists the "science" to fit its agenda. No thanks.

+1

I don’t trust stealth Republicans no matter what they might say to embed themselves in the community.

So is the head of the teachers' union a "stealth republican" then? Truly, there is no limit to APE's insidious, corrupting influence!

The issue isn’t that they think iPads in k-2 are bad; everyone agrees that they’re not ideal. The issue is that they are shifting the conversation to it. I agree that K-2 shouldn’t spend much time on iPads, but given they don’t actually spend a lot of time on them (and they need them for state testing), it’s a low-priority “issue”. There are many more important issues they should be addressing.

Their goal is to scream about APS and pretend like they’re building community consensus. They don’t actually address the hard issues.

The teacher page seems to be in
overwhelmingly agreement with APE on this issue.

The "teacher's page" (which only a small percentage of teachers belong to, and is run by AEA) does not speak for all teachers. And unless you're an APS teacher, you can't even access it, so you could very well be lying.

[Anonymous]

I think this forum is just APE members arguing with each other. And like maybe a person or two who sees them for who they are.

iPads are not a big deal. My kid has one, and it has not corrupted him or disadvantaged his education. His teacher uses it in the classroom so that she can focus on small group education for a small percentage of the day.

We can't talk about anything else that's truly wrong with APS because APE takes up all of the air. Just stop listening to them. Done.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think it’s significant that APE and AEA are in agreement with this. I support it as well as APS staff/parent

I don't take educational "recommendations" from a lobbying group that twists the "science" to fit its agenda. No thanks.

+1

I don’t trust stealth Republicans no matter what they might say to embed themselves in the community.

So is the head of the teachers' union a "stealth republican" then? Truly, there is no limit to APE's insidious, corrupting influence!

The issue isn’t that they think iPads in k-2 are bad; everyone agrees that they’re not ideal. The issue is that they are shifting the conversation to it. I agree that K-2 shouldn’t spend much time on iPads, but given they don’t actually spend a lot of time on them (and they need them for state testing), it’s a low-priority “issue”. There are many more important issues they should be addressing.

Their goal is to scream about APS and pretend like they’re building community consensus. They don’t actually address the hard issues.

Huh? Did you read the article? APE brought it up at March budget meeting as a way to save money. 1:1 devices in K-2 is something that could be cut that wouldn't hurt K-2 education while making room in the APS budget. As far as I know addressing the budget is a super important issue right now.

I'm not an APE supporter, but rejecting this proposal because it is also supported by APE is stupid.

So they’re arguing over a tiny amount vs addressing a huge cut in the budget by Youngkin.

It’s a distraction.

APS is considering lots of individual small line items to cut, including TJ, the Outdoor Lab, swimming field trips, etc. Those all add up. This was a budget meeting discussing what should be on that list, not a meeting with Youngkin. It was totally appropriate for that conversation. Stop being stupid.

As I understand it, the proposed school board budget for this year doesn’t cut any of those things. They put them all back in.

This was from a meeting in March. That's what was being discussed at the budget meeting. Read the article.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I think this forum is just APE members arguing with each other. And like maybe a person or two who sees them for who they are.

iPads are not a big deal. My kid has one, and it has not corrupted him or disadvantaged his education. His teacher uses it in the classroom so that she can focus on small group education for a small percentage of the day.

We can't talk about anything else that's truly wrong with APS because APE takes up all of the air. Just stop listening to them. Done.

Did you read the article or the thread? It was a suggestion as part of budget discussions. A way to cut the budget without impacting education that's also supported by teachers.

But don't let reality interrupt your rant. Carry on.