APS - Who is running for School Board?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I still can't believe so many people support Cristina when she clearly launched her campaign on an over-inflated resume, claiming a decade plus experience, when she's barely been out of a high school for a decade.

Then she touted her legislative experience when she just worked on the Hill for a year as a junior staffer.

And she constantly refers to herself as an "educator" and makes it sound like her job is a big-deal. Think about the 20-something junior consultants in your office: That's her.

This has nothing to do with her being a woman of color. It has to do with her misrepresenting herself.

This. This. This. Exactly on point.

THIS IS THE BIG BLUE MACHINE, GEARS SPINNING. Diaz-Torres has been a good "Arl Young Dems" boots on the ground for years, so the "Arlington Dems" are throwing their full support behind her despite her inexperience. (Case in point: Tafti's endorsement from day one.) Naiveté is not going to move APS forward with two seats open, likely one more (with Kanninen likely leaving), and a new Superintendent to be named who knows when. This is classic political b.s. and exactly what we DON'T need on the school board!

Yup, what s/he said! I'm definitely voting Sandy Munnell and David Priddy as they seem to be the only ones self-funding and without the big blue machine behind them. The rest can just go on away, asafp. (Especially Simms. Really, an endorsement from Booker, who's in bed with DeVos?!?!?!)

This is just nonsense. If we only elect people who can afford to self-fund their campaigns, we'd be stuck with Trumps, Romneys, and Bloombergs. Most younger candidates would be disqualified because they do not have 40 years of savings.

I didn't know Sandy and David are self-funding, but it makes sense to me that David would struggle convincing people to donate to him. He is the least prepared of all the candidates. I'm fine with Sandy but think she will go along with ever the admins want.

[Anonymous]

Priddy is not self-funded. Plenty of people have supported him.

He wasn't hand-picked, though, which is the point I think PP was trying to make.

Cristina is the hand-picked one.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I still can't believe so many people support Cristina when she clearly launched her campaign on an over-inflated resume, claiming a decade plus experience, when she's barely been out of a high school for a decade.

Then she touted her legislative experience when she just worked on the Hill for a year as a junior staffer.

And she constantly refers to herself as an "educator" and makes it sound like her job is a big-deal. Think about the 20-something junior consultants in your office: That's her.

This has nothing to do with her being a woman of color. It has to do with her misrepresenting herself.

People of color, when running for office or applying for jobs, are less likely to be chosen even when they have the same experience as their white counterparts. We do not need to do exactly what you are claiming Cristina did, which is lie about their resumes, to undercut them. If Cristina is unqualified, then a truthful telling of her background should suffice.

That this doesn't make sense to you is among the reasons there is so much inequity across APS.

[Anonymous]

I just got my ballot!

Steven - he'll stand up to the staffers.
Cristina - she called me and won me over with her knowledge about education policy
Sandy - she has experience in the classroom
Terron - he is passionate but not ready
David - he is a nice man but doesn't know what he's talking about

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I still can't believe so many people support Cristina when she clearly launched her campaign on an over-inflated resume, claiming a decade plus experience, when she's barely been out of a high school for a decade.

Then she touted her legislative experience when she just worked on the Hill for a year as a junior staffer.

And she constantly refers to herself as an "educator" and makes it sound like her job is a big-deal. Think about the 20-something junior consultants in your office: That's her.

This has nothing to do with her being a woman of color. It has to do with her misrepresenting herself.

This. This. This. Exactly on point.

Correct except the bolded. She wasn’t a junior staffer, she was in fact an intern.

You just don't seem to understand how hateful you sound. Also, you read her website and then lied about her educational background. We do not need this type of campaigning in school board elections. I don't allow my children to lie. I encourage you to grow up.

The one that exaggerates her experience is Cristina. I’ve read her webpage and LinkedIn. If she would just be honest about her inexperience she could use it to her advantage, but instead she’s pretending to have experience she doesn’t have. Please teach your children to not lie on their resumes, everyone gets caught.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I still can't believe so many people support Cristina when she clearly launched her campaign on an over-inflated resume, claiming a decade plus experience, when she's barely been out of a high school for a decade.

Then she touted her legislative experience when she just worked on the Hill for a year as a junior staffer.

And she constantly refers to herself as an "educator" and makes it sound like her job is a big-deal. Think about the 20-something junior consultants in your office: That's her.

This has nothing to do with her being a woman of color. It has to do with her misrepresenting herself.

This. This. This. Exactly on point.

Correct except the bolded. She wasn’t a junior staffer, she was in fact an intern.

You just don't seem to understand how hateful you sound. Also, you read her website and then lied about her educational background. We do not need this type of campaigning in school board elections. I don't allow my children to lie. I encourage you to grow up.

The one that exaggerates her experience is Cristina. I’ve read her webpage and LinkedIn. If she would just be honest about her inexperience she could use it to her advantage, but instead she’s pretending to have experience she doesn’t have. Please teach your children to not lie on their resumes, everyone gets caught.

Then, why did you lie about her?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I still can't believe so many people support Cristina when she clearly launched her campaign on an over-inflated resume, claiming a decade plus experience, when she's barely been out of a high school for a decade.

Then she touted her legislative experience when she just worked on the Hill for a year as a junior staffer.

And she constantly refers to herself as an "educator" and makes it sound like her job is a big-deal. Think about the 20-something junior consultants in your office: That's her.

This has nothing to do with her being a woman of color. It has to do with her misrepresenting herself.

This. This. This. Exactly on point.

Correct except the bolded. She wasn’t a junior staffer, she was in fact an intern.

You just don't seem to understand how hateful you sound. Also, you read her website and then lied about her educational background. We do not need this type of campaigning in school board elections. I don't allow my children to lie. I encourage you to grow up.

The one that exaggerates her experience is Cristina. I’ve read her webpage and LinkedIn. If she would just be honest about her inexperience she could use it to her advantage, but instead she’s pretending to have experience she doesn’t have. Please teach your children to not lie on their resumes, everyone gets caught.

Then, why did you lie about her?

Please point out the lie?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Apologies if someone has already made this point. I am opposed to Cristina for many reasons, but perhaps most of all BECAUSE she was TFA. If she really wanted to be a teacher, she could have earned a degree in education and done the hard work and study to become a teacher. Instead, she is arrogant enough to think that her NYU degree in Economic Theory and History is enough to make her a good HS math teacher. Even worse to think she can teach it to English language learners in an impoverished community. I suspect she thinks that her spunk and positive attitude were enough for those students to hunker down and learn statistics.

She's all talk and no action. All theory and no substance or solutions. That's what consultants do -- they "identify the problem" then pack up and leave, patting themselves on the back for their dedication to the cause, and move on to the next big thing.

APS needs someone who is willing to implement the solution and I don't think that's her.

People who use english language learners or disadvantaged students to undercut women of color like Cristina and Symone are the biggest reason why inequity exists in APS. You talk about equity like you understand it. If you did, you wouldn't lie about Cristina's background. Have you not seen her speak or been to her website? She has a master's degree and was an English language learner. Maybe she didn't earn her degree in the same way you did, but that's the point. Language learners don't have the same experience others do. Spunk and empathy aren't the same. Maybe you should give positivity a try. One woman of color being bullied out of the caucus...by Democrats...is enough.

Thanks for this post. It helped me make up my mind.

+50 Thanks for calling out the hate. I didn't know she was an English language learner.

Where do you see on Cristina's site that she says she was an English language learner? Her bio says that she was born in Massachusetts and her family moved to San Juan when she was a teenager.

She’s a Spanish learner, rather than an English learner. So it was flipped for her, but very similar. I was at a meet and greet with her where she talked about having to learn how to read and write in Spanish when her family moved to Puerto Rico.

And, so, what? That makes her qualified to serve on School Board?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I still can't believe so many people support Cristina when she clearly launched her campaign on an over-inflated resume, claiming a decade plus experience, when she's barely been out of a high school for a decade.

Then she touted her legislative experience when she just worked on the Hill for a year as a junior staffer.

And she constantly refers to herself as an "educator" and makes it sound like her job is a big-deal. Think about the 20-something junior consultants in your office: That's her.

This has nothing to do with her being a woman of color. It has to do with her misrepresenting herself.

This. This. This. Exactly on point.

Correct except the bolded. She wasn’t a junior staffer, she was in fact an intern.

You just don't seem to understand how hateful you sound. Also, you read her website and then lied about her educational background. We do not need this type of campaigning in school board elections. I don't allow my children to lie. I encourage you to grow up.

The one that exaggerates her experience is Cristina. I’ve read her webpage and LinkedIn. If she would just be honest about her inexperience she could use it to her advantage, but instead she’s pretending to have experience she doesn’t have. Please teach your children to not lie on their resumes, everyone gets caught.

Then, why did you lie about her?

Please point out the lie?

"she is arrogant enough to think that her NYU degree in Economic Theory and History is enough to make her a good HS math teacher." - She has a master's of education in curriculum and instruction.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Apologies if someone has already made this point. I am opposed to Cristina for many reasons, but perhaps most of all BECAUSE she was TFA. If she really wanted to be a teacher, she could have earned a degree in education and done the hard work and study to become a teacher. Instead, she is arrogant enough to think that her NYU degree in Economic Theory and History is enough to make her a good HS math teacher. Even worse to think she can teach it to English language learners in an impoverished community. I suspect she thinks that her spunk and positive attitude were enough for those students to hunker down and learn statistics.

She's all talk and no action. All theory and no substance or solutions. That's what consultants do -- they "identify the problem" then pack up and leave, patting themselves on the back for their dedication to the cause, and move on to the next big thing.

APS needs someone who is willing to implement the solution and I don't think that's her.

People who use english language learners or disadvantaged students to undercut women of color like Cristina and Symone are the biggest reason why inequity exists in APS. You talk about equity like you understand it. If you did, you wouldn't lie about Cristina's background. Have you not seen her speak or been to her website? She has a master's degree and was an English language learner. Maybe she didn't earn her degree in the same way you did, but that's the point. Language learners don't have the same experience others do. Spunk and empathy aren't the same. Maybe you should give positivity a try. One woman of color being bullied out of the caucus...by Democrats...is enough.

Thanks for this post. It helped me make up my mind.

Debatable that one woman of color was bullied out by Democrats. Nevertheless, the reigning theory here is that she was harassed out by a fellow African American Democrat.

What do you mean by "people who use english language learners or disadvantaged students to undercut women of color like Cristina and Symone"?
TFA is not highly regarded for quality training of teachers or quality teachers highly committed to teaching or pursuing a career in teaching. And for me, her limited classroom experience - in NEVADA - is almost irrelevant. It is nothing like teaching in Arlington.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Debatable that one woman of color was bullied out by Democrats. Nevertheless, the reigning theory here is that she was harassed out by a fellow African American Democrat.

What do you mean by "people who use english language learners or disadvantaged students to undercut women of color like Cristina and Symone"?
TFA is not highly regarded for quality training of teachers or quality teachers highly committed to teaching or pursuing a career in teaching. And for me, her limited classroom experience - in NEVADA - is almost irrelevant. It is nothing like teaching in Arlington.

I disagree that the reigning theory on here is that Sims harassed Symone out of the race. I mean, she's still in the race. She just has to run as a true independent. And a lot of people on this forum, especially other feds, seem to see through Symone's false narrative that paints her a victim. She got caught breaking the law. Nobody's fault but hers. And nobody's fault that the law doesn't allow to participate in the caucus. It is what it is. But it's definitely the reigning theory on the cluster that is AEM.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I still can't believe so many people support Cristina when she clearly launched her campaign on an over-inflated resume, claiming a decade plus experience, when she's barely been out of a high school for a decade.

Then she touted her legislative experience when she just worked on the Hill for a year as a junior staffer.

And she constantly refers to herself as an "educator" and makes it sound like her job is a big-deal. Think about the 20-something junior consultants in your office: That's her.

This has nothing to do with her being a woman of color. It has to do with her misrepresenting herself.

This. This. This. Exactly on point.

THIS IS THE BIG BLUE MACHINE, GEARS SPINNING. Diaz-Torres has been a good "Arl Young Dems" boots on the ground for years, so the "Arlington Dems" are throwing their full support behind her despite her inexperience. (Case in point: Tafti's endorsement from day one.) Naiveté is not going to move APS forward with two seats open, likely one more (with Kanninen likely leaving), and a new Superintendent to be named who knows when. This is classic political b.s. and exactly what we DON'T need on the school board!

Yup, what s/he said! I'm definitely voting Sandy Munnell and David Priddy as they seem to be the only ones self-funding and without the big blue machine behind them. The rest can just go on away, asafp. (Especially Simms. Really, an endorsement from Booker, who's in bed with DeVos?!?!?!)

Tim Kaine also endorsed Sims. It's on his website.

OMG. Endorsements from state and federal level office holders are so worthless - they are P URELY political. Those people don't know the first thing about serving on the Arlington SB or their endorsees' suitability for doing so.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I just got my ballot!

Steven - he'll stand up to the staffers.
Cristina - she called me and won me over with her knowledge about education policy
Sandy - she has experience in the classroom
Terron - he is passionate but not ready
David - he is a nice man but doesn't know what he's talking about

Well, on the bright side, yours is just one vote.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I just got my ballot!

Steven - he'll stand up to the staffers.
Cristina - she called me and won me over with her knowledge about education policy
Sandy - she has experience in the classroom
Terron - he is passionate but not ready
David - he is a nice man but doesn't know what he's talking about

Well, on the bright side, yours is just one vote.

And if you're not Steven, congratulations - you got two votes, Steven!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I still can't believe so many people support Cristina when she clearly launched her campaign on an over-inflated resume, claiming a decade plus experience, when she's barely been out of a high school for a decade.

Then she touted her legislative experience when she just worked on the Hill for a year as a junior staffer.

And she constantly refers to herself as an "educator" and makes it sound like her job is a big-deal. Think about the 20-something junior consultants in your office: That's her.

This has nothing to do with her being a woman of color. It has to do with her misrepresenting herself.

This. This. This. Exactly on point.

Correct except the bolded. She wasn’t a junior staffer, she was in fact an intern.

You just don't seem to understand how hateful you sound. Also, you read her website and then lied about her educational background. We do not need this type of campaigning in school board elections. I don't allow my children to lie. I encourage you to grow up.

The one that exaggerates her experience is Cristina. I’ve read her webpage and LinkedIn. If she would just be honest about her inexperience she could use it to her advantage, but instead she’s pretending to have experience she doesn’t have. Please teach your children to not lie on their resumes, everyone gets caught.

Then, why did you lie about her?

Please point out the lie?

"she is arrogant enough to think that her NYU degree in Economic Theory and History is enough to make her a good HS math teacher." - She has a master's of education in curriculum and instruction.

DP, but she went straight from NYU to TFA, right? And earned the masters from UNLV concurrently with her time teaching? She didn’t have an education degree during her time in the classroom, so I don’t think the comment above was a lie.