Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If this were my first exposure to APE this would all be very interesting but knowing that the same organization that now seems to be asking for increased teacher salaries was last year complaining that teachers were overly concerned about their health during covid and weren't working hard enough with remote learning tells me something about where the group really stands when it comes to teachers.

I'm at the point where APE says anything and I feel like I need to fact check it three different ways before I actually trust that it's true and not the product of some right-ish (for NOVA) wing spin machine. Beware.

Agreed!

+1

It’s a shame they didn’t just stick with the section about the testing. They didn’t even *lead* with that.

Instead, they started with that Northam/VDOE nonsense.

Tell me you didn’t read the newsletter without telling me you didn’t read the newsletter.

Which section do you think they led with? Wasn’t testing…

Hint: Go re-read the OP.

Troll.

School closures / SOLs / VMPI. All BS related to the current election. And apparently the #1 priority.

Section 2 was advocating for more testing. That was the only substantial section relevant to APS. Rest of newsletter was political filler.

You think public school closure regulations, standardized testing in public schools, and math curriculum in public schools have nothing to do with our public schools? That’s a new theory.

Yes, they started with a bunch of BS faux issues about “State-Level Education-Related Proposals and Legislation” because of the election.

They should have stuck with advocating for more testing. An actual issue with an actual solution that can help kids stay in the school.

The rest is BS, misinformation, or filler.

What part was misinformation? I am still confused about how public school regulation doesn’t relate to public schools. Do you think that just because the group’s focus is on APS they can’t advocate at all any level of public education regulation?

VMPI was misinformation. School closures is 100% political BS (explained on other thread). Aside from the testing section, the rest was filler.

Weak sauce.

Lunch lady. Not going the way you expected is it???

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If this were my first exposure to APE this would all be very interesting but knowing that the same organization that now seems to be asking for increased teacher salaries was last year complaining that teachers were overly concerned about their health during covid and weren't working hard enough with remote learning tells me something about where the group really stands when it comes to teachers.

I'm at the point where APE says anything and I feel like I need to fact check it three different ways before I actually trust that it's true and not the product of some right-ish (for NOVA) wing spin machine. Beware.

Agreed!

+1

It’s a shame they didn’t just stick with the section about the testing. They didn’t even *lead* with that.

Instead, they started with that Northam/VDOE nonsense.

Tell me you didn’t read the newsletter without telling me you didn’t read the newsletter.

Which section do you think they led with? Wasn’t testing…

Hint: Go re-read the OP.

Troll.

School closures / SOLs / VMPI. All BS related to the current election. And apparently the #1 priority.

Section 2 was advocating for more testing. That was the only substantial section relevant to APS. Rest of newsletter was political filler.

You think public school closure regulations, standardized testing in public schools, and math curriculum in public schools have nothing to do with our public schools? That’s a new theory.

Yes, they started with a bunch of BS faux issues about “State-Level Education-Related Proposals and Legislation” because of the election.

They should have stuck with advocating for more testing. An actual issue with an actual solution that can help kids stay in the school.

The rest is BS, misinformation, or filler.

You know APS is governed by VDOE, right?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If this were my first exposure to APE this would all be very interesting but knowing that the same organization that now seems to be asking for increased teacher salaries was last year complaining that teachers were overly concerned about their health during covid and weren't working hard enough with remote learning tells me something about where the group really stands when it comes to teachers.

I'm at the point where APE says anything and I feel like I need to fact check it three different ways before I actually trust that it's true and not the product of some right-ish (for NOVA) wing spin machine. Beware.

Agreed!

+1

It’s a shame they didn’t just stick with the section about the testing. They didn’t even *lead* with that.

Instead, they started with that Northam/VDOE nonsense.

Tell me you didn’t read the newsletter without telling me you didn’t read the newsletter.

Which section do you think they led with? Wasn’t testing…

Hint: Go re-read the OP.

Troll.

School closures / SOLs / VMPI. All BS related to the current election. And apparently the #1 priority.

Section 2 was advocating for more testing. That was the only substantial section relevant to APS. Rest of newsletter was political filler.

You think public school closure regulations, standardized testing in public schools, and math curriculum in public schools have nothing to do with our public schools? That’s a new theory.

Yes, they started with a bunch of BS faux issues about “State-Level Education-Related Proposals and Legislation” because of the election.

They should have stuck with advocating for more testing. An actual issue with an actual solution that can help kids stay in the school.

The rest is BS, misinformation, or filler.

What part was misinformation? I am still confused about how public school regulation doesn’t relate to public schools. Do you think that just because the group’s focus is on APS they can’t advocate at all any level of public education regulation?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If this were my first exposure to APE this would all be very interesting but knowing that the same organization that now seems to be asking for increased teacher salaries was last year complaining that teachers were overly concerned about their health during covid and weren't working hard enough with remote learning tells me something about where the group really stands when it comes to teachers.

I'm at the point where APE says anything and I feel like I need to fact check it three different ways before I actually trust that it's true and not the product of some right-ish (for NOVA) wing spin machine. Beware.

Agreed!

+1

It’s a shame they didn’t just stick with the section about the testing. They didn’t even *lead* with that.

Instead, they started with that Northam/VDOE nonsense.

Tell me you didn’t read the newsletter without telling me you didn’t read the newsletter.

Which section do you think they led with? Wasn’t testing…

Hint: Go re-read the OP.

Troll.

School closures / SOLs / VMPI. All BS related to the current election. And apparently the #1 priority.

Section 2 was advocating for more testing. That was the only substantial section relevant to APS. Rest of newsletter was political filler.

You think public school closure regulations, standardized testing in public schools, and math curriculum in public schools have nothing to do with our public schools? That’s a new theory.

Yes, they started with a bunch of BS faux issues about “State-Level Education-Related Proposals and Legislation” because of the election.

They should have stuck with advocating for more testing. An actual issue with an actual solution that can help kids stay in the school.

The rest is BS, misinformation, or filler.

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]If this were my first exposure to APE this would all be very interesting but knowing that the same organization that now seems to be asking for increased teacher salaries was last year complaining that teachers were overly concerned about their health during covid and weren't working hard enough with remote learning tells me something about where the group really stands when it comes to teachers.

I'm at the point where APE says anything and I feel like I need to fact check it three different ways before I actually trust that it's true and not the product of some right-ish (for NOVA) wing spin machine. Beware.[/quote]

Agreed![/quote]

+1

It’s a shame they didn’t just stick with the section about the testing. They didn’t even *lead* with that.

Instead, they started with that Northam/VDOE nonsense.
[/quote]
Tell me you didn’t read the newsletter without telling me you didn’t read the newsletter.[/quote]

Which section do you think they led with? Wasn’t testing…

Hint: Go re-read the OP.
[/quote]

Troll.

School closures / SOLs / VMPI. All BS related to the current election. And apparently the #1 priority.

Section 2 was advocating for more testing. That was the only substantial section relevant to APS. Rest of newsletter was political filler.
[/quote]
You think public school closure regulations, standardized testing in public schools, and math curriculum in public schools have nothing to do with our public schools? That’s a new theory.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If this were my first exposure to APE this would all be very interesting but knowing that the same organization that now seems to be asking for increased teacher salaries was last year complaining that teachers were overly concerned about their health during covid and weren't working hard enough with remote learning tells me something about where the group really stands when it comes to teachers.

I'm at the point where APE says anything and I feel like I need to fact check it three different ways before I actually trust that it's true and not the product of some right-ish (for NOVA) wing spin machine. Beware.

Agreed!

+1

It’s a shame they didn’t just stick with the section about the testing. They didn’t even *lead* with that.

Instead, they started with that Northam/VDOE nonsense.

Tell me you didn’t read the newsletter without telling me you didn’t read the newsletter.

Which section do you think they led with? Wasn’t testing…

Hint: Go re-read the OP.

Oh, sweetie. You didn’t read the newsletter.

Are you trolling?

Section 1 - Northam / VDOE (clearly a priority now with the gubernatorial election)
Section 2 - Testing
Etc.

If this is the brain trust running SR, that group makes so much more sense now.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If this were my first exposure to APE this would all be very interesting but knowing that the same organization that now seems to be asking for increased teacher salaries was last year complaining that teachers were overly concerned about their health during covid and weren't working hard enough with remote learning tells me something about where the group really stands when it comes to teachers.

I'm at the point where APE says anything and I feel like I need to fact check it three different ways before I actually trust that it's true and not the product of some right-ish (for NOVA) wing spin machine. Beware.

Agreed!

+1

It’s a shame they didn’t just stick with the section about the testing. They didn’t even *lead* with that.

Instead, they started with that Northam/VDOE nonsense.

Tell me you didn’t read the newsletter without telling me you didn’t read the newsletter.

Which section do you think they led with? Wasn’t testing…

Hint: Go re-read the OP.

Troll.

School closures / SOLs / VMPI. All BS related to the current election. And apparently the #1 priority.

Section 2 was advocating for more testing. That was the only substantial section relevant to APS. Rest of newsletter was political filler.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If this were my first exposure to APE this would all be very interesting but knowing that the same organization that now seems to be asking for increased teacher salaries was last year complaining that teachers were overly concerned about their health during covid and weren't working hard enough with remote learning tells me something about where the group really stands when it comes to teachers.

I'm at the point where APE says anything and I feel like I need to fact check it three different ways before I actually trust that it's true and not the product of some right-ish (for NOVA) wing spin machine. Beware.

Agreed!

+1

It’s a shame they didn’t just stick with the section about the testing. They didn’t even *lead* with that.

Instead, they started with that Northam/VDOE nonsense.

Tell me you didn’t read the newsletter without telling me you didn’t read the newsletter.

Which section do you think they led with? Wasn’t testing…

Hint: Go re-read the OP.

Oh, sweetie. You didn’t read the newsletter.

Are you trolling?

Section 1 - Northam / VDOE (clearly a priority now with the gubernatorial election)
Section 2 - Testing
Etc.

If this is the brain trust running SR, that group makes so much more sense now.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If this were my first exposure to APE this would all be very interesting but knowing that the same organization that now seems to be asking for increased teacher salaries was last year complaining that teachers were overly concerned about their health during covid and weren't working hard enough with remote learning tells me something about where the group really stands when it comes to teachers.

I'm at the point where APE says anything and I feel like I need to fact check it three different ways before I actually trust that it's true and not the product of some right-ish (for NOVA) wing spin machine. Beware.

Agreed!

+1

It’s a shame they didn’t just stick with the section about the testing. They didn’t even *lead* with that.

Instead, they started with that Northam/VDOE nonsense.

Tell me you didn’t read the newsletter without telling me you didn’t read the newsletter.

Which section do you think they led with? Wasn’t testing…

Hint: Go re-read the OP.

Oh, sweetie. You didn’t read the newsletter.

Are you trolling?

Section 1 - Northam / VDOE (clearly a priority now with the gubernatorial election)
Section 2 - Testing
Etc.

Again, you didn’t read the newsletter. The first section multiple parts - what were they, and in what order?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If this were my first exposure to APE this would all be very interesting but knowing that the same organization that now seems to be asking for increased teacher salaries was last year complaining that teachers were overly concerned about their health during covid and weren't working hard enough with remote learning tells me something about where the group really stands when it comes to teachers.

I'm at the point where APE says anything and I feel like I need to fact check it three different ways before I actually trust that it's true and not the product of some right-ish (for NOVA) wing spin machine. Beware.

Agreed!

+1

It’s a shame they didn’t just stick with the section about the testing. They didn’t even *lead* with that.

Instead, they started with that Northam/VDOE nonsense.

Tell me you didn’t read the newsletter without telling me you didn’t read the newsletter.

Which section do you think they led with? Wasn’t testing…

Hint: Go re-read the OP.

Oh, sweetie. You didn’t read the newsletter.

Are you trolling?

Section 1 - Northam / VDOE (clearly a priority now with the gubernatorial election)
Section 2 - Testing
Etc.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If this were my first exposure to APE this would all be very interesting but knowing that the same organization that now seems to be asking for increased teacher salaries was last year complaining that teachers were overly concerned about their health during covid and weren't working hard enough with remote learning tells me something about where the group really stands when it comes to teachers.

I'm at the point where APE says anything and I feel like I need to fact check it three different ways before I actually trust that it's true and not the product of some right-ish (for NOVA) wing spin machine. Beware.

Yup. They also said they didn't push for SB 1303 but now they also want to take credit for it. They are very hard to trust.

Where is APE taking credit for SB1303? I didn’t see that in the newsletter.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If this were my first exposure to APE this would all be very interesting but knowing that the same organization that now seems to be asking for increased teacher salaries was last year complaining that teachers were overly concerned about their health during covid and weren't working hard enough with remote learning tells me something about where the group really stands when it comes to teachers.

I'm at the point where APE says anything and I feel like I need to fact check it three different ways before I actually trust that it's true and not the product of some right-ish (for NOVA) wing spin machine. Beware.

Agreed!

+1

It’s a shame they didn’t just stick with the section about the testing. They didn’t even *lead* with that.

Instead, they started with that Northam/VDOE nonsense.

Tell me you didn’t read the newsletter without telling me you didn’t read the newsletter.

Which section do you think they led with? Wasn’t testing…

Hint: Go re-read the OP.

Oh, sweetie. You didn’t read the newsletter.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:https://us7.campaign-archive.com/?u=12119a80f9eb7a7322f4902ae&id=d68764cd18

October 3, 2021
In This Issue:
1. State-Level Education Decisions and Your Child--A Closer Look
2. Tell Richmond: Help APS Get Test to Stay!
3. School Board Meeting Recap
4. Happening this Week

We do really need Test to Stay. My son had to miss school for a week because of a close contact. So impractical and of course he was negative for COVID afterwards.

Agreed. I’m glad APE is giving attention to this, because there’s no way APS would consider it otherwise.

Who pays for all those tests? I thought APS was out of money.

Anonymous wrote:If this were my first exposure to APE this would all be very interesting but knowing that the same organization that now seems to be asking for increased teacher salaries was last year complaining that teachers were overly concerned about their health during covid and weren't working hard enough with remote learning tells me something about where the group really stands when it comes to teachers.

I'm at the point where APE says anything and I feel like I need to fact check it three different ways before I actually trust that it's true and not the product of some right-ish (for NOVA) wing spin machine. Beware.

Yup. They also said they didn't push for SB 1303 but now they also want to take credit for it. They are very hard to trust.