Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Get rid of them.
They've been infested with APEs who don't even have kids in APS and are trying to push their anti-public school agenda.
While I seriously doubt this- you do illustrate the problem with the current system. Its super easy with anyone for an ax to grind to seize control of one of these committees, and suck up staff resources.
At least one of the APE guys on the math committee doesn’t have kids in APS and writes MAGA propaganda about schools on a RW blog.
Anonymous wrote:Get rid of them.
They've been infested with APEs who don't even have kids in APS and are trying to push their anti-public school agenda.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Get rid of them.
They've been infested with APEs who don't even have kids in APS and are trying to push their anti-public school agenda.
While I seriously doubt this- you do illustrate the problem with the current system. Its super easy with anyone for an ax to grind to seize control of one of these committees, and suck up staff resources.
At least one of the APE guys on the math committee doesn’t have kids in APS and writes MAGA propaganda about schools on a RW blog.
Can he can get us an advanced math course offering in 5th grade?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Get rid of them.
They've been infested with APEs who don't even have kids in APS and are trying to push their anti-public school agenda.
LOL, the APE Derangement Syndrome strikes again. Were you in the last thread spouting anti-APE stuff?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Get rid of them.
They've been infested with APEs who don't even have kids in APS and are trying to push their anti-public school agenda.
While I seriously doubt this- you do illustrate the problem with the current system. Its super easy with anyone for an ax to grind to seize control of one of these committees, and suck up staff resources.
At least one of the APE guys on the math committee doesn’t have kids in APS and writes MAGA propaganda about schools on a RW blog.
Can he can get us an advanced math course offering in 5th grade?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Get rid of them.
They've been infested with APEs who don't even have kids in APS and are trying to push their anti-public school agenda.
While I seriously doubt this- you do illustrate the problem with the current system. Its super easy with anyone for an ax to grind to seize control of one of these committees, and suck up staff resources.
At least one of the APE guys on the math committee doesn’t have kids in APS and writes MAGA propaganda about schools on a RW blog.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Get rid of them.
They've been infested with APEs who don't even have kids in APS and are trying to push their anti-public school agenda.
While I seriously doubt this- you do illustrate the problem with the current system. Its super easy with anyone for an ax to grind to seize control of one of these committees, and suck up staff resources.
Anonymous wrote:Get rid of them.
They've been infested with APEs who don't even have kids in APS and are trying to push their anti-public school agenda.
Anonymous wrote:Get rid of them.
They've been infested with APEs who don't even have kids in APS and are trying to push their anti-public school agenda.
Anonymous wrote:I'm curious what people's thoughts are on the proposed changes to the advisory committee structures-
https://go.boarddocs.com/vsba/arlington/Board.nsf/files/DQLNGJ5FDF71/$file/B-3.6.30%20Combined.pdf
I served on the ACTL/ACI for several years. I was always conflicted on whether it was a really valuable thing or just a massive waste of time and resource suck for APS staff. There were all these subject matter subcommittees. Theoretically they were appointed by the school board, but in reality anyone who wanted to be on one could. They each had a staff member assigned, and frequently I felt like the recommendations coming out of the subcommittees were a few individuals pet projects that were sucking up resources. Some of them were just insane. (e.g. calling for an 'equity audit' across the entire curriculum.) They commonly involved adding more central office staff, and they also consumed a significant amount of central office staff time.
On the other hand, the english language advisory committee did heroic work pushing year after year for the science of reading and against lucy calkins. I'm curious about others thoughts..