APS School Board race

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Just saw this! https://www.mirandaturner.org/

She has my vote.

Just saw this? I feel like this is a plant. Anyway, can anyone confirm that this is a new campaign and not someone just stumbling upon her last campaign?

New! From the email that announced:

“Your support was crucial two years ago, and I'm asking for it again. I'm running for School Board in 2023 and I can't do it without you!

My priorities are simple:
Focusing on instruction that supports our students.
Prioritizing the resources to recruit, support, and retain our teachers.
Setting expectations that promote the best in all.
Providing oversight that asks tough questions on the budget and facilities.
Communicating with the community in a frequent, clear, and transparent way.”

I would never trust the judgment of someone who has been a leader in that group. Beyond all of their terrible behavior during the pandemic, they were still pushing GOP propaganda in 2022.

Arlington already rejected her once. Do it again.

Who cares! At least it is an opposing view and would actually make the Board have to think and possibly do something besides nod their heads dumbly and congratulate themselves!

This whole thread is just ridiculous. Who cares who is running? The same exact type of people are voted in each time and they do the same. exact. thing. which is nothing and think the. same. exact. way as all the previous boards. There is no change. And then people like you say stupid stuff about how the Board is terrible and needs to be voted out. 🙄 Why??? To be replaced with exactly the same?

+1 Once I started learning about the school board and how much they do nothing except add to Syphax and start patting each other in the back is when I started researching private schools. Gulp.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:According to a post on AEM there is another person that might jump in the race...

"The four candidates I've heard are, Erin (confirmed), Miranda (confirmed), Angelo Cocchiaro (Confirmed), and Maggie Slye (rumored)."

It looks like Maggie Slye chairs the Early Childhood Advisory Committee that Miranda Turner also a member of.

Oh I gasped! I know Maggie Slye. She's wonderful and whip smart. Yes please!!

I’d love to hear more about her if she does run.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I know her, although not well. I have mixed feelings on her. Her kids are nice, which in general speaks highly of a parent. She is a solid Key volunteer. She is EXTREMELY committed to the 'keep Key on Key' movement, anyone who feels differently must have nefarious motives or be stupid. She can be kind of standoffish. I don't know who the other candidates are.

That's the way Mary Kadera was about McKinley disappearing. Didn't stop her from getting on the Board.

That is true up to a point. Mary K was McKinley PTA president at the time- and she represented the McKinley viewpoint- Mckinley was more caught of guard then Key, and there were other options- moving ats to mcKinley was not the only viable option.
In contrast- Erin was part of the keep key on key movement for years. My memory on this issue goes back a long time- multiple times aps planning staff tried to engage the Key community about the need to move and get them to work collaboratively on a location. It was very clear for a long time that they needed the Key building as a neighborhood school. Erin was part of, if not the leader of, a group of parents who treated the staff with contempt and mocked them for even trying to raise the idea of a move. She absolutely refused to consider the validity of any of the data the staff presented about the need for a neighborhood school at the Key site, and she was extremely dismissive of any Key parent trying to suggest that we should be open to a new location. She was absolutely caught up in groupthink about it- talking to that group of parents was like talking to a buzz saw.

It’s fun to revisit some of that rhetoric about how a move would destroy the program. As far as I know everything move related has actually been totally fine and the effed up thing we should have been worried about (Covid) was a total surprise.

+1

Correct. Everything Erin & team said would happen didn't come to frution. A majority of Key parents have actually moved on, it's just a small group that can't get over it. This group isn't respected within APS circles or the larger Immersion community (parents, staff, admins, etc).

So is Erin's platform about moving Key back or anything to do with that? The Key community seems pretty tightly knit so one can assume she will get a ton of votes from that

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Just saw this! https://www.mirandaturner.org/

She has my vote.

Just saw this? I feel like this is a plant. Anyway, can anyone confirm that this is a new campaign and not someone just stumbling upon her last campaign?

New! From the email that announced:

“Your support was crucial two years ago, and I'm asking for it again. I'm running for School Board in 2023 and I can't do it without you!

My priorities are simple:
Focusing on instruction that supports our students.
Prioritizing the resources to recruit, support, and retain our teachers.
Setting expectations that promote the best in all.
Providing oversight that asks tough questions on the budget and facilities.
Communicating with the community in a frequent, clear, and transparent way.”

I would never trust the judgment of someone who has been a leader in that group. Beyond all of their terrible behavior during the pandemic, they were still pushing GOP propaganda in 2022.

Arlington already rejected her once. Do it again.

Really?! is this what "GOP propaganda" look like:

from Miranda's website: "I’ve been an APS parent since 2015. I was a founding member of the Drew PTA in 2019 and still serve as Social Media Chair, am involved with the Montessori Public School of Arlington PTA, and serve as site liaison for the Drew/Green Valley Girls on the Run team. I’m a member of the Early Childhood Education Committee for the Advisory Council on Teaching & Learning. I volunteer as a Precinct Captain for the Arlington Democrats and spent time last fall knocking doors and poll greeting to elect local Democrats. I’m also a member of Green Valley Civic Association’s Executive Committee and our delegate to the Civic Federation.

In my professional life as a lawyer, I devote substantial time to volunteer pro bono work. I currently represent Planned Parenthood and litigate abortion rights in federal court, and I’ve mentored younger lawyers in housing rights cases and parole proceedings. "

She is a DINO. She's in it to win it, and has the race all locked up. She says the right Dem things while her base in her parent group will support her through the caucus and all the way to the election. She's very smary, savvy. It's not even a real race. She's going to run away with this.

Exactly.

If you were actually reading their newsletters, you’d see it. On the surface, she’s a shiny D. But she has been with this group for years. That says plenty.

I hope she does run away with it. Between her and Mary K we may actually have people on the school board doing something other than patting each other on the back

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I know her, although not well. I have mixed feelings on her. Her kids are nice, which in general speaks highly of a parent. She is a solid Key volunteer. She is EXTREMELY committed to the 'keep Key on Key' movement, anyone who feels differently must have nefarious motives or be stupid. She can be kind of standoffish. I don't know who the other candidates are.

That's the way Mary Kadera was about McKinley disappearing. Didn't stop her from getting on the Board.

That is true up to a point. Mary K was McKinley PTA president at the time- and she represented the McKinley viewpoint- Mckinley was more caught of guard then Key, and there were other options- moving ats to mcKinley was not the only viable option.
In contrast- Erin was part of the keep key on key movement for years. My memory on this issue goes back a long time- multiple times aps planning staff tried to engage the Key community about the need to move and get them to work collaboratively on a location. It was very clear for a long time that they needed the Key building as a neighborhood school. Erin was part of, if not the leader of, a group of parents who treated the staff with contempt and mocked them for even trying to raise the idea of a move. She absolutely refused to consider the validity of any of the data the staff presented about the need for a neighborhood school at the Key site, and she was extremely dismissive of any Key parent trying to suggest that we should be open to a new location. She was absolutely caught up in groupthink about it- talking to that group of parents was like talking to a buzz saw.

It’s fun to revisit some of that rhetoric about how a move would destroy the program. As far as I know everything move related has actually been totally fine and the effed up thing we should have been worried about (Covid) was a total surprise.

+1

Correct. Everything Erin & team said would happen didn't come to frution. A majority of Key parents have actually moved on, it's just a small group that can't get over it. This group isn't respected within APS circles or the larger Immersion community (parents, staff, admins, etc).

I’m a Key parent who is definitely over it, and yes, it’s mostly been fine… but the move did serve to shrink the immersion program, because Key previously had 6 K classes but can only fit 4 in the new building. So that’s one concern that did come true— fewer kids get to start immersion.

Going down to 4 K classes wasn't a product of the move. That had been long talked about and advocated for by immersion admins for years. Erin and "keep Key on Key" advocates did the Key community a disservice by linking the 2 issues. There is another whole thread on this site that talks about the quality of instruction at Key and how it needs to be improved. It's very hard to know each student by name, strength and need in an elementary school with over 700 students. Especially given the high number of SPED students and all immersion students are language learners.

As a Key parent for 8+ years, no…. The class reduction was due to the move. Claremont had advocated for fewer students/classes due to overcrowding, but Key never did (at least not that I ever heard about).

+1

I thought Key had to move, but they wanted to expand immersion, not shrink it. Hope they can find a way to expand in the future if the demand is still there (it was before the pandemic/move).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I know her, although not well. I have mixed feelings on her. Her kids are nice, which in general speaks highly of a parent. She is a solid Key volunteer. She is EXTREMELY committed to the 'keep Key on Key' movement, anyone who feels differently must have nefarious motives or be stupid. She can be kind of standoffish. I don't know who the other candidates are.

That's the way Mary Kadera was about McKinley disappearing. Didn't stop her from getting on the Board.

That is true up to a point. Mary K was McKinley PTA president at the time- and she represented the McKinley viewpoint- Mckinley was more caught of guard then Key, and there were other options- moving ats to mcKinley was not the only viable option.
In contrast- Erin was part of the keep key on key movement for years. My memory on this issue goes back a long time- multiple times aps planning staff tried to engage the Key community about the need to move and get them to work collaboratively on a location. It was very clear for a long time that they needed the Key building as a neighborhood school. Erin was part of, if not the leader of, a group of parents who treated the staff with contempt and mocked them for even trying to raise the idea of a move. She absolutely refused to consider the validity of any of the data the staff presented about the need for a neighborhood school at the Key site, and she was extremely dismissive of any Key parent trying to suggest that we should be open to a new location. She was absolutely caught up in groupthink about it- talking to that group of parents was like talking to a buzz saw.

It’s fun to revisit some of that rhetoric about how a move would destroy the program. As far as I know everything move related has actually been totally fine and the effed up thing we should have been worried about (Covid) was a total surprise.

I didn't say the community a
+1

Correct. Everything Erin & team said would happen didn't come to frution. A majority of Key parents have actually moved on, it's just a small group that can't get over it. This group isn't respected within APS circles or the larger Immersion community (parents, staff, admins, etc).

I’m a Key parent who is definitely over it, and yes, it’s mostly been fine… but the move did serve to shrink the immersion program, because Key previously had 6 K classes but can only fit 4 in the new building. So that’s one concern that did come true— fewer kids get to start immersion.

Going down to 4 K classes wasn't a product of the move. That had been long talked about and advocated for by immersion admins for years. Erin and "keep Key on Key" advocates did the Key community a disservice by linking the 2 issues. There is another whole thread on this site that talks about the quality of instruction at Key and how it needs to be improved. It's very hard to know each student by name, strength and need in an elementary school with over 700 students. Especially given the high number of SPED students and all immersion students are language learners.

As a Key parent for 8+ years, no…. The class reduction was due to the move. Claremont had advocated for fewer students/classes due to overcrowding, but Key never did (at least not that I ever heard about).

Do you trust that your principal at Key would advocate for what is best for the school even if parents don't see the need when it comes to school size? Key parent leaders didn't foster an environment that allowed for its admins or APS to explain why reducing the number of K classes was needed or best.

From my understanding, there isn't a long waiting list of Spanish Ks that haven't been able to get into Key the last 2 years.

Claremont did advocate to going down to 4 K classes but also to increase the number of VPI classes from 2 to 4. This helps to improve outcomes for EL students by providing them with bilingual early childhood education and increase access to the immersion program for the students that need it the most. Key PTA could have and should have advocated for the same, but again, they decided to fight APS instead of partnering with them. They also created in environment that didn't allow for Ms. Perdomo to openly share what she thinks might have been best for Key.

As a key parent of 8 years have you ever heard your principal or anyone from APS say the reason Key needed 4 K was because of the move? Or have you only heard that from parents and teachers?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:According to a post on AEM there is another person that might jump in the race...

"The four candidates I've heard are, Erin (confirmed), Miranda (confirmed), Angelo Cocchiaro (Confirmed), and Maggie Slye (rumored)."

It looks like Maggie Slye chairs the Early Childhood Advisory Committee that Miranda Turner also a member of.

Ok so Maggie leads the early childhood committee and Erin has led a PTA. Both of those seem like good experience.

Has Miranda actually led anything? I just see a lot of memberships listed on her website.

Not even bothering to ask about personal trainer guy.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Just saw this! https://www.mirandaturner.org/

She has my vote.

Just saw this? I feel like this is a plant. Anyway, can anyone confirm that this is a new campaign and not someone just stumbling upon her last campaign?

New! From the email that announced:

“Your support was crucial two years ago, and I'm asking for it again. I'm running for School Board in 2023 and I can't do it without you!

My priorities are simple:
Focusing on instruction that supports our students.
Prioritizing the resources to recruit, support, and retain our teachers.
Setting expectations that promote the best in all.
Providing oversight that asks tough questions on the budget and facilities.
Communicating with the community in a frequent, clear, and transparent way.”

I would never trust the judgment of someone who has been a leader in that group. Beyond all of their terrible behavior during the pandemic, they were still pushing GOP propaganda in 2022.

Arlington already rejected her once. Do it again.

Really?! is this what "GOP propaganda" look like:

from Miranda's website: "I’ve been an APS parent since 2015. I was a founding member of the Drew PTA in 2019 and still serve as Social Media Chair, am involved with the Montessori Public School of Arlington PTA, and serve as site liaison for the Drew/Green Valley Girls on the Run team. I’m a member of the Early Childhood Education Committee for the Advisory Council on Teaching & Learning. I volunteer as a Precinct Captain for the Arlington Democrats and spent time last fall knocking doors and poll greeting to elect local Democrats. I’m also a member of Green Valley Civic Association’s Executive Committee and our delegate to the Civic Federation.

In my professional life as a lawyer, I devote substantial time to volunteer pro bono work. I currently represent Planned Parenthood and litigate abortion rights in federal court, and I’ve mentored younger lawyers in housing rights cases and parole proceedings. "

I think the PP is talking about Arlington Parents for Education, the group that Miranda founded and led.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:According to a post on AEM there is another person that might jump in the race...

"The four candidates I've heard are, Erin (confirmed), Miranda (confirmed), Angelo Cocchiaro (Confirmed), and Maggie Slye (rumored)."

It looks like Maggie Slye chairs the Early Childhood Advisory Committee that Miranda Turner also a member of.

Ok so Maggie leads the early childhood committee and Erin has led a PTA. Both of those seem like good experience.

Has Miranda actually led anything? I just see a lot of memberships listed on her website.

Not even bothering to ask about personal trainer guy.

Maggie has also led a school as a principal.

Miranda helped start AEM and is one of their "leaders".

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Just saw this! https://www.mirandaturner.org/

She has my vote.

Just saw this? I feel like this is a plant. Anyway, can anyone confirm that this is a new campaign and not someone just stumbling upon her last campaign?

New! From the email that announced:

“Your support was crucial two years ago, and I'm asking for it again. I'm running for School Board in 2023 and I can't do it without you!

My priorities are simple:
Focusing on instruction that supports our students.
Prioritizing the resources to recruit, support, and retain our teachers.
Setting expectations that promote the best in all.
Providing oversight that asks tough questions on the budget and facilities.
Communicating with the community in a frequent, clear, and transparent way.”

I would never trust the judgment of someone who has been a leader in that group. Beyond all of their terrible behavior during the pandemic, they were still pushing GOP propaganda in 2022.

Arlington already rejected her once. Do it again.

+1

But be careful, her supporters will get any criticism of MT or the group that she led removed from this board

What is the GOP propoganda, specifically?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Just saw this! https://www.mirandaturner.org/

She has my vote.

Just saw this? I feel like this is a plant. Anyway, can anyone confirm that this is a new campaign and not someone just stumbling upon her last campaign?

New! From the email that announced:

“Your support was crucial two years ago, and I'm asking for it again. I'm running for School Board in 2023 and I can't do it without you!

My priorities are simple:
Focusing on instruction that supports our students.
Prioritizing the resources to recruit, support, and retain our teachers.
Setting expectations that promote the best in all.
Providing oversight that asks tough questions on the budget and facilities.
Communicating with the community in a frequent, clear, and transparent way.”

I would never trust the judgment of someone who has been a leader in that group. Beyond all of their terrible behavior during the pandemic, they were still pushing GOP propaganda in 2022.

Arlington already rejected her once. Do it again.

Really?! is this what "GOP propaganda" look like:

from Miranda's website: "I’ve been an APS parent since 2015. I was a founding member of the Drew PTA in 2019 and still serve as Social Media Chair, am involved with the Montessori Public School of Arlington PTA, and serve as site liaison for the Drew/Green Valley Girls on the Run team. I’m a member of the Early Childhood Education Committee for the Advisory Council on Teaching & Learning. I volunteer as a Precinct Captain for the Arlington Democrats and spent time last fall knocking doors and poll greeting to elect local Democrats. I’m also a member of Green Valley Civic Association’s Executive Committee and our delegate to the Civic Federation.

In my professional life as a lawyer, I devote substantial time to volunteer pro bono work. I currently represent Planned Parenthood and litigate abortion rights in federal court, and I’ve mentored younger lawyers in housing rights cases and parole proceedings. "

Where is the leadership in this bio? I see a lot of member and am involved with. Also, I would like to know for how long. That's missing too.

This looks like someone who lost a school board race then ran out and joined a lot of committees so she could put it on her website to run again and appear more experienced this time.

But what has she actually ACCOMPLISHED in any of these roles????

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:According to a post on AEM there is another person that might jump in the race...

"The four candidates I've heard are, Erin (confirmed), Miranda (confirmed), Angelo Cocchiaro (Confirmed), and Maggie Slye (rumored)."

It looks like Maggie Slye chairs the Early Childhood Advisory Committee that Miranda Turner also a member of.

Ok so Maggie leads the early childhood committee and Erin has led a PTA. Both of those seem like good experience.

Has Miranda actually led anything? I just see a lot of memberships listed on her website.

Not even bothering to ask about personal trainer guy.

Maggie has also led a school as a principal.

Miranda helped start AEM and is one of their "leaders".

No, Miranda did not help to start AEM and is not one of the leaders of AEM. AEM is a Facebook group and Miranda does not lead it. Do you mean Arlington Parents for Education?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:According to a post on AEM there is another person that might jump in the race...

"The four candidates I've heard are, Erin (confirmed), Miranda (confirmed), Angelo Cocchiaro (Confirmed), and Maggie Slye (rumored)."

It looks like Maggie Slye chairs the Early Childhood Advisory Committee that Miranda Turner also a member of.

Ok so Maggie leads the early childhood committee and Erin has led a PTA. Both of those seem like good experience.

Has Miranda actually led anything? I just see a lot of memberships listed on her website.

Not even bothering to ask about personal trainer guy.

Maggie has also led a school as a principal.

Miranda helped start AEM and is one of their "leaders".

Maggie was a principal? When? Where?

She sounds really interesting!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:According to a post on AEM there is another person that might jump in the race...

"The four candidates I've heard are, Erin (confirmed), Miranda (confirmed), Angelo Cocchiaro (Confirmed), and Maggie Slye (rumored)."

It looks like Maggie Slye chairs the Early Childhood Advisory Committee that Miranda Turner also a member of.

Ok so Maggie leads the early childhood committee and Erin has led a PTA. Both of those seem like good experience.

Has Miranda actually led anything? I just see a lot of memberships listed on her website.

Not even bothering to ask about personal trainer guy.

Maggie has also led a school as a principal.

Miranda helped start AEM and is one of their "leaders".

That's incorrect. MT has nothing to do with AEM, which is just a forum on FB, except to post their occassionally. She's a voice of reason on AEM, but she absolutley didn't found it and doesn't run it either.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Just saw this! https://www.mirandaturner.org/

She has my vote.

Just saw this? I feel like this is a plant. Anyway, can anyone confirm that this is a new campaign and not someone just stumbling upon her last campaign?

New! From the email that announced:

“Your support was crucial two years ago, and I'm asking for it again. I'm running for School Board in 2023 and I can't do it without you!

My priorities are simple:
Focusing on instruction that supports our students.
Prioritizing the resources to recruit, support, and retain our teachers.
Setting expectations that promote the best in all.
Providing oversight that asks tough questions on the budget and facilities.
Communicating with the community in a frequent, clear, and transparent way.”

I would never trust the judgment of someone who has been a leader in that group. Beyond all of their terrible behavior during the pandemic, they were still pushing GOP propaganda in 2022.

Arlington already rejected her once. Do it again.

+1

But be careful, her supporters will get any criticism of MT or the group that she led removed from this board

What is the GOP propoganda, specifically?

I'm not sure, I'm not the PP, so I'd like to hear that too. But maybe they meant that Miranda founded and led APE, which had/has a lot of GOP members, with conservative viewpoints like school vouchers. And a lot of that group voted for Youngkin based on his parents rights platform.