AEM is not happy about SB1303

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’m always shocked by how little otherwise involved and intelligent (and also VERY concerned with equity) parents avoid getting involved in their kids schools at any level. Who do they think runs the books sales, the coat drives, the fun runs, the teacher appreciation breakfasts? Maybe you think none of it matters? Kind of sad.

The attack on the poster that referenced families that run these types of events as "good families" is outrageous.

No it’s not. It was likely written and defended by “nice white parents”. I took issue with it. I’ve been active in our schools PTAs for many years.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’m always shocked by how little otherwise involved and intelligent (and also VERY concerned with equity) parents avoid getting involved in their kids schools at any level. Who do they think runs the books sales, the coat drives, the fun runs, the teacher appreciation breakfasts? Maybe you think none of it matters? Kind of sad.

The attack on the poster that referenced families that run these types of events as "good families" is outrageous.

No it’s not. It was likely written and defended by “nice white parents”. I took issue with it. I’ve been active in our schools PTAs for many years.

so let me get this straight, if someone referenced you as a "good family" for being active in the school, you would be offended?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’m always shocked by how little otherwise involved and intelligent (and also VERY concerned with equity) parents avoid getting involved in their kids schools at any level. Who do they think runs the books sales, the coat drives, the fun runs, the teacher appreciation breakfasts? Maybe you think none of it matters? Kind of sad.

The attack on the poster that referenced families that run these types of events as "good families" is outrageous.

No it’s not. It was likely written and defended by “nice white parents”. I took issue with it. I’ve been active in our schools PTAs for many years.

so let me get this straight, if someone referenced you as a "good family" for being active in the school, you would be offended?

She said good families would leave for private. As if well off good families (the only ones who can afford private) are the only ones who contribute to PTA and the school community. Her post reeks of privilege. Most families cannot afford private, it’s tone deaf. If you don’t see it...

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’m always shocked by how little otherwise involved and intelligent (and also VERY concerned with equity) parents avoid getting involved in their kids schools at any level. Who do they think runs the books sales, the coat drives, the fun runs, the teacher appreciation breakfasts? Maybe you think none of it matters? Kind of sad.

The attack on the poster that referenced families that run these types of events as "good families" is outrageous.

No it’s not. It was likely written and defended by “nice white parents”. I took issue with it. I’ve been active in our schools PTAs for many years.

so let me get this straight, if someone referenced you as a "good family" for being active in the school, you would be offended?

She said good families would leave for private. As if well off good families (the only ones who can afford private) are the only ones who contribute to PTA and the school community. Her post reeks of privilege. Most families cannot afford private, it’s tone deaf. If you don’t see it...

That's not how I read it. I know several very active families that I would identify as "good" families that can't afford private. The assumptions here are a bit much.

[Anonymous]

Nowhere did I read that poster saying or suggesting "bad/less fortunate families will be stuck in public".

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’m always shocked by how little otherwise involved and intelligent (and also VERY concerned with equity) parents avoid getting involved in their kids schools at any level. Who do they think runs the books sales, the coat drives, the fun runs, the teacher appreciation breakfasts? Maybe you think none of it matters? Kind of sad.

The attack on the poster that referenced families that run these types of events as "good families" is outrageous.

No it’s not. It was likely written and defended by “nice white parents”. I took issue with it. I’ve been active in our schools PTAs for many years.

so let me get this straight, if someone referenced you as a "good family" for being active in the school, you would be offended?

She said good families would leave for private. As if well off good families (the only ones who can afford private) are the only ones who contribute to PTA and the school community. Her post reeks of privilege. Most families cannot afford private, it’s tone deaf. If you don’t see it...

Exactly. It’s a gross comment.

[Anonymous]

The comment was implying that we need to cater to the “good” rich parents as if their wishes mattered more than everyone else’s.

The people we know who’ve left won’t be coming back if it’s hybrid or 5-day in-person anyway. So it’s an empty “threat”.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The comment was implying that we need to cater to the “good” rich parents as if their wishes mattered more than everyone else’s.

The people we know who’ve left won’t be coming back if it’s hybrid or 5-day in-person anyway. So it’s an empty “threat”.

People will twist and turn any comments on here to identify and attack "privileged parents". There was nothing wrong with that comment unless you twist it and read it to suit your own personal judgment.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The comment was implying that we need to cater to the “good” rich parents as if their wishes mattered more than everyone else’s.

The people we know who’ve left won’t be coming back if it’s hybrid or 5-day in-person anyway. So it’s an empty “threat”.

People will twist and turn any comments on here to identify and attack "privileged parents". There was nothing wrong with that comment unless you twist it and read it to suit your own personal judgment.

So you think APS should make decisions based on what the "good" rich parents do?

My personal judgement is that we live in a community with many different interests and challenges. APS needs to balance the needs of all kids and families. I don't think the "good" rich families have any more say than anyone else.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The comment was implying that we need to cater to the “good” rich parents as if their wishes mattered more than everyone else’s.

The people we know who’ve left won’t be coming back if it’s hybrid or 5-day in-person anyway. So it’s an empty “threat”.

People will twist and turn any comments on here to identify and attack "privileged parents". There was nothing wrong with that comment unless you twist it and read it to suit your own personal judgment.

So you think APS should make decisions based on what the "good" rich parents do?

My personal judgement is that we live in a community with many different interests and challenges. APS needs to balance the needs of all kids and families. I don't think the "good" rich families have any more say than anyone else.

The inference of someone commenting on a family being "good" means they are rich/privileged is pretty pathetic. Should that poster had said "bad families that contribute time/resources to our child's educational experience are leaving"? would that make you feel better?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The comment was implying that we need to cater to the “good” rich parents as if their wishes mattered more than everyone else’s.

The people we know who’ve left won’t be coming back if it’s hybrid or 5-day in-person anyway. So it’s an empty “threat”.

People will twist and turn any comments on here to identify and attack "privileged parents". There was nothing wrong with that comment unless you twist it and read it to suit your own personal judgment.

So you think APS should make decisions based on what the "good" rich parents do?

My personal judgement is that we live in a community with many different interests and challenges. APS needs to balance the needs of all kids and families. I don't think the "good" rich families have any more say than anyone else.

The inference of someone commenting on a family being "good" means they are rich/privileged is pretty pathetic. Should that poster had said "bad families that contribute time/resources to our child's educational experience are leaving"? would that make you feel better?

How do you not understand that underprivileged (and even middle class) families cannot leave for private!?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The comment was implying that we need to cater to the “good” rich parents as if their wishes mattered more than everyone else’s.

The people we know who’ve left won’t be coming back if it’s hybrid or 5-day in-person anyway. So it’s an empty “threat”.

People will twist and turn any comments on here to identify and attack "privileged parents". There was nothing wrong with that comment unless you twist it and read it to suit your own personal judgment.

So you think APS should make decisions based on what the "good" rich parents do?

My personal judgement is that we live in a community with many different interests and challenges. APS needs to balance the needs of all kids and families. I don't think the "good" rich families have any more say than anyone else.

The inference of someone commenting on a family being "good" means they are rich/privileged is pretty pathetic. Should that poster had said "bad families that contribute time/resources to our child's educational experience are leaving"? would that make you feel better?

Do you think APS should be catering to these good/bad families?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The comment was implying that we need to cater to the “good” rich parents as if their wishes mattered more than everyone else’s.

The people we know who’ve left won’t be coming back if it’s hybrid or 5-day in-person anyway. So it’s an empty “threat”.

People will twist and turn any comments on here to identify and attack "privileged parents". There was nothing wrong with that comment unless you twist it and read it to suit your own personal judgment.

So you think APS should make decisions based on what the "good" rich parents do?

My personal judgement is that we live in a community with many different interests and challenges. APS needs to balance the needs of all kids and families. I don't think the "good" rich families have any more say than anyone else.

The inference of someone commenting on a family being "good" means they are rich/privileged is pretty pathetic. Should that poster had said "bad families that contribute time/resources to our child's educational experience are leaving"? would that make you feel better?

How do you not understand that underprivileged (and even middle class) families cannot leave for private!?

oh lord.. most people can't afford private.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The comment was implying that we need to cater to the “good” rich parents as if their wishes mattered more than everyone else’s.

The people we know who’ve left won’t be coming back if it’s hybrid or 5-day in-person anyway. So it’s an empty “threat”.

People will twist and turn any comments on here to identify and attack "privileged parents". There was nothing wrong with that comment unless you twist it and read it to suit your own personal judgment.

So you think APS should make decisions based on what the "good" rich parents do?

My personal judgement is that we live in a community with many different interests and challenges. APS needs to balance the needs of all kids and families. I don't think the "good" rich families have any more say than anyone else.

The inference of someone commenting on a family being "good" means they are rich/privileged is pretty pathetic. Should that poster had said "bad families that contribute time/resources to our child's educational experience are leaving"? would that make you feel better?

How do you not understand that underprivileged (and even middle class) families cannot leave for private!?

]

Good and bad families will leave. Better?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The comment was implying that we need to cater to the “good” rich parents as if their wishes mattered more than everyone else’s.

The people we know who’ve left won’t be coming back if it’s hybrid or 5-day in-person anyway. So it’s an empty “threat”.

People will twist and turn any comments on here to identify and attack "privileged parents". There was nothing wrong with that comment unless you twist it and read it to suit your own personal judgment.

So you think APS should make decisions based on what the "good" rich parents do?

My personal judgement is that we live in a community with many different interests and challenges. APS needs to balance the needs of all kids and families. I don't think the "good" rich families have any more say than anyone else.

The inference of someone commenting on a family being "good" means they are rich/privileged is pretty pathetic. Should that poster had said "bad families that contribute time/resources to our child's educational experience are leaving"? would that make you feel better?

Do you think APS should be catering to these good/bad families?

^^ still waiting on this.

Do you think APS should cater to the (good/bad) families who have the luxury of leaving APS?