APS School Board race

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:There is a lot of hate on here for Miranda. Reid was a worthless SB member who didn’t announce he was retiring until the last day before the filing deadline. I see no complaints about him. He was rude to me several times during open office hours. He clearly is sexist and doesn’t respect women, and fears strong women who speak their mind.

I see that bias and hatred runs strong on DCUM too. Miranda is a Mom of three whose very young kids struggled with a year on screens in their house. All of you hating on her should check YOUR bias against women, especially working women. Would you spout such personal vitriol against a man? Of course not. You save that anger for a woman. Despicable

Guess you weren’t paying attention. I’ve complained about him on this very thread and many before it.

[Anonymous]

Reid was terrible. A belligerent old man that got worse as time went on.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I found this. Starts at 1:35. I think there may have been one more.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gBWXLCKL61s&t=1564s

I just watched this starting at the time stamp indicated.

First question was on how the candidates was on racial equity in APS and what candidates would do to improve the educational experience of students of color. Mary gave a better answer overall, but Miranda's was pretty similar. Talking about equity, literacy, and need for data and monitoring. She talked about the persistent achievement gaps in APS. The next question was what was the one single priority in the budget the candidates supported to address equity in APS. Miranda talked about the need to pay teachers more because APS was falling behind. Mary talked about more professional learning of staff and families to understand systemic racism.

Other questions continue on busing, gentrification, ACDC caucus, clean energy for the bus fleet and then SROs. (2:01) She was definitely anti SROs and specifically answered that as a lawyer, she viewed it through the "prism of rights and when a police officer is present your rights are different"

And I didn't see Miranda in the other NAACP link posted but Mike Webb stole the show there and not in a good way.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Jeff/Admin: Can you explain why posts in this thread keep getting deleted if they mention APE?

There is a post directly above yours that mentions APE that did not get deleted. Posts are getting deleted for that reason. They are getting deleted for making false statements.

This group, which a SB candidate led for years, was an open schools group in Arlington. They were abusive online and in school board meetings. Some of their most aggressive, vocal members were anti-maskers, anti-CRT, pro-voucher. They were aligned with open schools groups out in FCPS and LCPS. Including Ian Prior, PDE (Koch bro), etc.

I really hope the normal lurkers on this page are not buying these defamatory lies. Literally none of this true. It'd be laughable if we we're living in an era of mis-information and conspiracy theory uptake. Please do your own research and look into this group, read their newsletters, and explore their website. I know some of them personally and they are all very active in their school communities and closely aligned with many APS teachers. There are a few deranged trolls on this page (likely the same people making the same outlandish claims on AEM) that are obsessed and continue to spread lies. They make accusation with no evidence or links. They associate people who have long been kicked out of APE if they went against their values and mission as being "leaders." It's disturbing.

No,PP, they are true. I'm involved in school issues, know MT, know APE. I can respect different views and I respect her for some of her advocacy. But APE was unhinged for a while, and MT didn't see that forest for the trees until later. Their level of anger and personal attacks turned off people like me who were open to their original advocacy.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I found this. Starts at 1:35. I think there may have been one more.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gBWXLCKL61s&t=1564s

I just watched this starting at the time stamp indicated.

First question was on how the candidates was on racial equity in APS and what candidates would do to improve the educational experience of students of color. Mary gave a better answer overall, but Miranda's was pretty similar. Talking about equity, literacy, and need for data and monitoring. She talked about the persistent achievement gaps in APS. The next question was what was the one single priority in the budget the candidates supported to address equity in APS. Miranda talked about the need to pay teachers more because APS was falling behind. Mary talked about more professional learning of staff and families to understand systemic racism.

Other questions continue on busing, gentrification, ACDC caucus, clean energy for the bus fleet and then SROs. (2:01) She was definitely anti SROs and specifically answered that as a lawyer, she viewed it through the "prism of rights and when a police officer is present your rights are different"

And I didn't see Miranda in the other NAACP link posted but Mike Webb stole the show there and not in a good way.

Thank you for the summary. I watched this video and have seen them in action elsewhere debating, though not the Ed Committee debate. I have heard Mary speak and I believe she has a basic understanding of systemic inequity. Miranda in this video just seemed to say what the audience wanted. When someone talks about outcomes for "all students," that's not equity. At all. Its code for white students should be prioritized too. Except that they are always centered in the system. Miranda doesn't get it. Mary gets it more, but may not be all the way there yet.

I don't want to vote for Miranda. At all. I don't want to vote for Antonio either. I agree it's a bad slate.

[Anonymous]

APE members still are angry. In any thread you walk in, they still can't get over 2020. While it was awful, it's done and will never, ever happen again. I need a candidate who can stop talking about it, acknowledge the past, but look to the future. Miranda ain't it.

[Anonymous]

Anyone else worried a 22 year old is running for school board? Did he even graduate from APS?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Anyone else worried a 22 year old is running for school board? Did he even graduate from APS?

He’s not from Arlington or even Northern Virginia.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Anyone else worried a 22 year old is running for school board? Did he even graduate from APS?

He’s not from Arlington or even Northern Virginia.

And yet a viable contender given the other option.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:APE members still are angry. In any thread you walk in, they still can't get over 2020. While it was awful, it's done and will never, ever happen again. I need a candidate who can stop talking about it, acknowledge the past, but look to the future. Miranda ain't it.

Are you kidding me? I follow AEM and APE. The only place I see people fighting about 2020 is on AEM. It's not APE that is stuck in 2020.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Anyone else worried a 22 year old is running for school board? Did he even graduate from APS?

I'm certainly worried about it. I'm also worried about another candidate who is too divisive for me, and can't/won't be clear with her stances on issues. Neither of them belong on our SB, but here we are.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:APE members still are angry. In any thread you walk in, they still can't get over 2020. While it was awful, it's done and will never, ever happen again. I need a candidate who can stop talking about it, acknowledge the past, but look to the future. Miranda ain't it.

Are you kidding me? I follow AEM and APE. The only place I see people fighting about 2020 is on AEM. It's not APE that is stuck in 2020.

Lol no one talks about it on AEM, except APE members. Even people here have pretty much moved on from 2020, except APE members.

Also, "Learning loss" is code for "I only care about what happened in 2020-21, and not the systemic learning disparities that happened before or after to marginalized groups." I roll my eyes at anyone (including Duran) who talks about it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:APE members still are angry. In any thread you walk in, they still can't get over 2020. While it was awful, it's done and will never, ever happen again. I need a candidate who can stop talking about it, acknowledge the past, but look to the future. Miranda ain't it.

Are you kidding me? I follow AEM and APE. The only place I see people fighting about 2020 is on AEM. It's not APE that is stuck in 2020.

Lol no one talks about it on AEM, except APE members. Even people here have pretty much moved on from 2020, except APE members.

Also, "Learning loss" is code for "I only care about what happened in 2020-21, and not the systemic learning disparities that happened before or after to marginalized groups." I roll my eyes at anyone (including Duran) who talks about it.

Exactly. ”Learning loss” is part of the right’s continued attack on public schools.

They could address academic issues in a variety of ways and choose to focus on that and use those words.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:APE members still are angry. In any thread you walk in, they still can't get over 2020. While it was awful, it's done and will never, ever happen again. I need a candidate who can stop talking about it, acknowledge the past, but look to the future. Miranda ain't it.

Are you kidding me? I follow AEM and APE. The only place I see people fighting about 2020 is on AEM. It's not APE that is stuck in 2020.

Lol no one talks about it on AEM, except APE members. Even people here have pretty much moved on from 2020, except APE members.

Also, "Learning loss" is code for "I only care about what happened in 2020-21, and not the systemic learning disparities that happened before or after to marginalized groups." I roll my eyes at anyone (including Duran) who talks about it.

Exactly. ”Learning loss” is part of the right’s continued attack on public schools.

They could address academic issues in a variety of ways and choose to focus on that and use those words.

But how are the Arlington democrats addressing academic issues for all learners? I am new and curious and feel so confused by all these school board threads.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:APE members still are angry. In any thread you walk in, they still can't get over 2020. While it was awful, it's done and will never, ever happen again. I need a candidate who can stop talking about it, acknowledge the past, but look to the future. Miranda ain't it.

Are you kidding me? I follow AEM and APE. The only place I see people fighting about 2020 is on AEM. It's not APE that is stuck in 2020.

Lol no one talks about it on AEM, except APE members. Even people here have pretty much moved on from 2020, except APE members.

Also, "Learning loss" is code for "I only care about what happened in 2020-21, and not the systemic learning disparities that happened before or after to marginalized groups." I roll my eyes at anyone (including Duran) who talks about it.

Exactly. ”Learning loss” is part of the right’s continued attack on public schools.

They could address academic issues in a variety of ways and choose to focus on that and use those words.

But how are the Arlington democrats addressing academic issues for all learners? I am new and curious and feel so confused by all these school board threads.

Pushing for science of learning, etc.