Anonymous wrote:what position exactly are they pushing? the only thing you've included here is a list of suggested considerations? isn't that what APS asked for in the survey? why is that advocacy against anyone's interests?
Anonymous wrote:what position exactly are they pushing? the only thing you've included here is a list of suggested considerations? isn't that what APS asked for in the survey? why is that advocacy against anyone's interests?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Tuckahoe needs a new PTA because the families who will be rezoned to Reed/Nottingham/McKinley should want a great option school nearby. ATS is impossible to get into. If we listen to the Tuckahoe PTA, they will try to fill it to capacity with unnatural acts. Really think about who the Tuckahoe PTA is representing. Parents who live a few blocks from Tuckahoe? Or the entire Tuckahoe PTA community?
Just out of curiosity, what makes for a "great" option school? ATS? Any of the others?
Anonymous wrote:Tuckahoe needs a new PTA because the families who will be rezoned to Reed/Nottingham/McKinley should want a great option school nearby. ATS is impossible to get into. If we listen to the Tuckahoe PTA, they will try to fill it to capacity with unnatural acts. Really think about who the Tuckahoe PTA is representing. Parents who live a few blocks from Tuckahoe? Or the entire Tuckahoe PTA community?
Anonymous wrote:Tuckahoe needs a new PTA because the families who will be rezoned to Reed/Nottingham/McKinley should want a great option school nearby. ATS is impossible to get into. If we listen to the Tuckahoe PTA, they will try to fill it to capacity with unnatural acts. Really think about who the Tuckahoe PTA is representing. Parents who live a few blocks from Tuckahoe? Or the entire Tuckahoe PTA community?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Tuckahoe should form a second PTA. One PTA that represents the close walkers and another PTA for those who can't wait to go to Reed, McKinley and Nottingham. By the numbers the Tuckahoe walkers are in the minority. What about a PTA recall...is that even possible?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Why are APS resources and the Tuckahoe website being used to lobby for options that aren't inclusive of all APS students? It looks like APS the SB and Tuckahoe administration are endorsing the non-inclusive views of the Tuckahoe PTA.
Can the PTA use APS resources to push a position? They have a few pages just about this change?
https://tuckahoe.apsva.us/aps-survey-information-please-read-take-surveys/
Crazy.
Send a letter to APS and the Tuckahoe principal about it. They are lobbying for a position that isn't even in the best interest of all the families in their boundary. It's pretty disgusting.
Just curious: are you a current Tuckahoe parent? I'm not, but I can't imagine anyone who currently goes there not feeling connected to the school and hoping to be moved to another school (unless they were just moved to Tuckahoe during the last boundary change).
Most of the families that are walkable to Reed are looking forward to being moved to Reed. Those are current Tuckahoe families.
Are you one of them?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Tuckahoe should form a second PTA. One PTA that represents the close walkers and another PTA for those who can't wait to go to Reed, McKinley and Nottingham. By the numbers the Tuckahoe walkers are in the minority. What about a PTA recall...is that even possible?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Why are APS resources and the Tuckahoe website being used to lobby for options that aren't inclusive of all APS students? It looks like APS the SB and Tuckahoe administration are endorsing the non-inclusive views of the Tuckahoe PTA.
Can the PTA use APS resources to push a position? They have a few pages just about this change?
https://tuckahoe.apsva.us/aps-survey-information-please-read-take-surveys/
Crazy.
Send a letter to APS and the Tuckahoe principal about it. They are lobbying for a position that isn't even in the best interest of all the families in their boundary. It's pretty disgusting.
Just curious: are you a current Tuckahoe parent? I'm not, but I can't imagine anyone who currently goes there not feeling connected to the school and hoping to be moved to another school (unless they were just moved to Tuckahoe during the last boundary change).
Most of the families that are walkable to Reed are looking forward to being moved to Reed. Those are current Tuckahoe families.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Tuckahoe should form a second PTA. One PTA that represents the close walkers and another PTA for those who can't wait to go to Reed, McKinley and Nottingham. By the numbers the Tuckahoe walkers are in the minority. What about a PTA recall...is that even possible?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Why are APS resources and the Tuckahoe website being used to lobby for options that aren't inclusive of all APS students? It looks like APS the SB and Tuckahoe administration are endorsing the non-inclusive views of the Tuckahoe PTA.
Can the PTA use APS resources to push a position? They have a few pages just about this change?
https://tuckahoe.apsva.us/aps-survey-information-please-read-take-surveys/
Crazy.
Send a letter to APS and the Tuckahoe principal about it. They are lobbying for a position that isn't even in the best interest of all the families in their boundary. It's pretty disgusting.
Just curious: are you a current Tuckahoe parent? I'm not, but I can't imagine anyone who currently goes there not feeling connected to the school and hoping to be moved to another school (unless they were just moved to Tuckahoe during the last boundary change).
Anonymous wrote:I don't think it is per-se wrong for the PTA to be organizing a lobbying effort- certainly the other PTA's have done similar things. (e.g. ASFS PTA with respect to the choice changes last year, Claremont PTA asking last year for the neighborhood preference policy to be revoked, Campbell PTA lobbying that they be allowed to stay in their location.)
That being said- I think they have gone way over the top and should have lost all credibility. Unfortunately it seems like mass hysteria and aggressive organized numbers often prevail in APS.
Anonymous wrote:I don't think it is per-se wrong for the PTA to be organizing a lobbying effort- certainly the other PTA's have done similar things. (e.g. ASFS PTA with respect to the choice changes last year, Claremont PTA asking last year for the neighborhood preference policy to be revoked, Campbell PTA lobbying that they be allowed to stay in their location.)
That being said- I think they have gone way over the top and should have lost all credibility. Unfortunately it seems like mass hysteria and aggressive organized numbers often prevail in APS.
Anonymous wrote:Tuckahoe should form a second PTA. One PTA that represents the close walkers and another PTA for those who can't wait to go to Reed, McKinley and Nottingham. By the numbers the Tuckahoe walkers are in the minority. What about a PTA recall...is that even possible?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Why are APS resources and the Tuckahoe website being used to lobby for options that aren't inclusive of all APS students? It looks like APS the SB and Tuckahoe administration are endorsing the non-inclusive views of the Tuckahoe PTA.
Can the PTA use APS resources to push a position? They have a few pages just about this change?
https://tuckahoe.apsva.us/aps-survey-information-please-read-take-surveys/
Crazy.
Send a letter to APS and the Tuckahoe principal about it. They are lobbying for a position that isn't even in the best interest of all the families in their boundary. It's pretty disgusting.