AAP Expansion and Haycock - Elizabeth Schultz amendment

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You clearly don't understand the relationship between a student and teacher. These are third graders-not high school kids.
Again, it was inappropriate and in poor taste. If the principal approved it, she was inconsiderate of the kids as well--but she does not have the personal relationship with them that the teacher does. The teacher should have known better.

She was exercising her rights and made it very clear nothing should be taken personally or as directed at individual students. If students were upset, it was more likely not because of anything she said, but because of what their parents may have said to them before and after she spoke. And absolutely nothing that she said spoke to her relationship to her students this year.

Her students are very bright kids. They know what all of this means and can read between the lines.
If they wanted a teacher to speak, it would have made more sense to have a gen Ed teacher speak.

That presumes she was nominated to testify, rather than that she took the initiative to speak. In addition, since Schultz's proposal was to move AAP kids but not GenEd kids to a Pimmit annex, an AAP teacher would have been a more logical person to speak to the disadvantages of that scenario.

You should just admit that you didn't agree with the substance of her remarks and stop pretending it's a question of "good taste" or claiming she was forced to speak by unnamed others.

[Anonymous]

She never said she wanted Cluster 2 students removed. She was merely saying that enough was enough and that the school needed relief. They SB receved over 15 individual letters from teachers as well. Teachers have spoken at the SB before, it's freedom of speech people! Enough is enough, let's move on.

[Anonymous]

Who better to speak about the working conditions at a school than the people who work there? Is it wrong for them to speak up after remaining silent year after year? It does reach a point where enough is enough and is unsafe and prevents the full curriculum from being implemented. FCPS and Janie Strauss should have taken action sooner---Haycock parents have been advocating for relief for the last 5 years. But unfortunately for everyone at Haycock, the school was allowed to get more crowded every year. This year was the breaking point. FCPS task force made the proposal to realign AAP elementary and middle school AAP centers with their high schools county-wide. From a common sense view, this makes sense. Recognizing that not all AAP centers have the same issues or challenges, there may be no one size fits all solution. But for Haycock, it did make sense. The proposed solution would reduce Haycock's population and that is something the community has been advocating for the past several years. It was not in an effort to push Cluster 2 students out but they were the population that was put on the table by the task force. It is difficult in the best of situations to be the ones asked to leave but it is also very difficult to the ones to say "we need you to leave". This was an extremely difficult situation for everyone and it was a situation where not everyone could be accommodated. The population at Haycock had to be reduced for safety and educational reasons. Please try to refrain from placing blame. You know the saying, "to understand a person, you need to walk a mile in their shoes"---well it applies here. Teachers and parents have a right to speak up about their circumstances. Do not point fingers until you have walked a mile in their shoes, least of all the teachers!!!

[Anonymous]

Bad Taste is bringing children in to fight adult issues.
Children should not be used as pawns in the fight.
There are many adult decision that impact children that should not involve children in the decision making---this was one of them. Shame on the parents for using their children in a video, shame on the parents for bringing their children to the meetings.
There is not a teacher at Haycock that does not dedicate themselves to the children. They give so much to our children and go above and beyond. It was right of them to speak out when they could no longer do the job in the manner that they pride themselves on doing. Do not point fingers. If your child was hurt by teacher testimony then it was your fault for bringing your child to the meeting or sharing the meeting with them. It is a parent's responsibility to shield their child from adult issues until they are mature enough to understand.

[Anonymous]

Did it not ever occur to you that perhaps the teacher was being brave and chose to speak up for the greater good? From her testimony it sounds like the crowded working conditions at Haycock were compromising the children's education. How conscientious was Mrs. Bertsch to speak out for our children's education. I am impressed. It takes guts to do this when you subject yourself to ridicule from people who accuse her of poor taste and ruining teacher/child relationships when in fact the bottom line is that you do not like what she has to say. I applaud her for speaking up for what is right and safeguarding all of our children's education.

[Anonymous]

Right is in the eye of the beholder PP. though I am certain that you feel your kids were not "safeguarded" at Haycock before, that really isn't the case.

[Anonymous]

Agreed! She spoke from the heart! Lets not blame.

[Anonymous]

Stop the sockpuppetting. It's not helping anyone's case.

[Anonymous]

Of course the teacher had the "right" to speak. I still say it showed poor judgment and poor taste on her part.

As to speaking to the "greater good', anyone familiar with the school board knows that most votes are decided prior to the meetings. The meetings are "kabuki theater".

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Of course the teacher had the "right" to speak. I still say it showed poor judgment and poor taste on her part.

As to speaking to the "greater good', anyone familiar with the school board knows that most votes are decided prior to the meetings. The meetings are "kabuki theater".

Give it a rest lady. What about the parents who paraded their own kids in front of the School Board with signs?

This has been decided. Move on and stop pretending you're Miss Manners.

[Anonymous]

Give it a rest lady. What about the parents who paraded their own kids in front of the School Board with signs?


Also in poor taste and reflects poor judgment.

[Anonymous]

The debate was not about who had the right to be at Haycock. All the students districted to Haycock had the right to be there.
But Haycock grew to be so crowded it was in crisis. How do you determine which students should be redistricted? A very very difficult decision. The task force proposal and school board vote for Haycock was determined in a 10-2 vote to realign students with their middle and high schools. This was decisive.
It is time to come together and reestablish a sense of community. Lets have no sore losers or boastful winners. This was not a competition but a determination about what is best for students. Time to move forward.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The debate was not about who had the right to be at Haycock. All the students districted to Haycock had the right to be there.
But Haycock grew to be so crowded it was in crisis. How do you determine which students should be redistricted? A very very difficult decision. The task force proposal and school board vote for Haycock was determined in a 10-2 vote to realign students with their middle and high schools. This was decisive.
It is time to come together and reestablish a sense of community. Lets have no sore losers or boastful winners. This was not a competition but a determination about what is best for students. Time to move forward.

Almost, but not quite. It was an alignment by clusters, which include some split feeders. Both Westgate and Lemon Road, although in the Marshall pyramid, are split feeders to Kilmer/Marshall and Longfellow/McLean.

But, yes, time to move forward.