Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Let the record reflect that Key went down swinging. Fought the good fight.

Well, I’ll agree that they fought. But I think many that fought on their behalf were/still are very divisive, hostile, selfish and had no qualms pitting one small group of lower SES students against others of equal need. Frankly, there’s no way I’m putting my kids in the lottery for Key; the parents have been a huge turn-off and I don’t know whether it will be a healthy environment for the next few years.

We won’t miss you.

Wow, I’m sure this is a troll not an actual key parent. So over the top.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Let the record reflect that Key went down swinging. Fought the good fight.

Well, I’ll agree that they fought. But I think many that fought on their behalf were/still are very divisive, hostile, selfish and had no qualms pitting one small group of lower SES students against others of equal need. Frankly, there’s no way I’m putting my kids in the lottery for Key; the parents have been a huge turn-off and I don’t know whether it will be a healthy environment for the next few years.

We won’t miss you.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Let the record reflect that Key went down swinging. Fought the good fight.

Well, I’ll agree that they fought. But I think many that fought on their behalf were/still are very divisive, hostile, selfish and had no qualms pitting one small group of lower SES students against others of equal need. Frankly, there’s no way I’m putting my kids in the lottery for Key; the parents have been a huge turn-off and I don’t know whether it will be a healthy environment for the next few years.

A healthy environment? You’re that triggered by some parents reasonably exercising their civic prerogatives to let their voices be heard?

You lost me at “reasonably.”

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Let the record reflect that Key went down swinging. Fought the good fight.

Well, I’ll agree that they fought. But I think many that fought on their behalf were/still are very divisive, hostile, selfish and had no qualms pitting one small group of lower SES students against others of equal need. Frankly, there’s no way I’m putting my kids in the lottery for Key; the parents have been a huge turn-off and I don’t know whether it will be a healthy environment for the next few years.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Let the record reflect that Key went down swinging. Fought the good fight.

Well, I’ll agree that they fought. But I think many that fought on their behalf were/still are very divisive, hostile, selfish and had no qualms pitting one small group of lower SES students against others of equal need. Frankly, there’s no way I’m putting my kids in the lottery for Key; the parents have been a huge turn-off and I don’t know whether it will be a healthy environment for the next few years.

A healthy environment? You’re that triggered by some parents reasonably exercising their civic prerogatives to let their voices be heard?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Let the record reflect that Key went down swinging. Fought the good fight.

Well, I’ll agree that they fought. But I think many that fought on their behalf were/still are very divisive, hostile, selfish and had no qualms pitting one small group of lower SES students against others of equal need. Frankly, there’s no way I’m putting my kids in the lottery for Key; the parents have been a huge turn-off and I don’t know whether it will be a healthy environment for the next few years.

With sadness, I agree with that sentiment. The hysterical no-move parents were a huge turn off and did more to “destroy communities” than the move will. I seek out reasonable people who respect not only diversity, but also diverse ideas.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Let the record reflect that Key went down swinging. Fought the good fight.

Well, I’ll agree that they fought. But I think many that fought on their behalf were/still are very divisive, hostile, selfish and had no qualms pitting one small group of lower SES students against others of equal need. Frankly, there’s no way I’m putting my kids in the lottery for Key; the parents have been a huge turn-off and I don’t know whether it will be a healthy environment for the next few years.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Let the record reflect that Key went down swinging. Fought the good fight.

Well, I’ll agree that they fought. But I think many that fought on their behalf were/still are very divisive, hostile, selfish and had no qualms pitting one small group of lower SES students against others of equal need. Frankly, there’s no way I’m putting my kids in the lottery for Key; the parents have been a huge turn-off and I don’t know whether it will be a healthy environment for the next few years.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I move for reconsideration!

Based on what rationale?

Bad Data!

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:so 44% of Ashlawn moves and 33% of Taylor moves and 90% Mck to Reed while another 10% split up to respective schools?
sooooo is APS sending 44% of of Ashlawn staff to the new schools? Is APS staff sending 33% of Taylor staff to the new schools the students will attend? Mck?
Is this the plan for staff in these scenarios that people seem to talk so much about?
I'm really confused why staff are not treated as grown adults who can choose to go to whatever school they want? Including staying put if they so choose? If I'm not mistaken, APS cannot FORCE staff to do anything can they? If they were given a job at a building, can they keep it if they want? Take a teacher hired at Key Immersion, was his/her employment tied to the program or building? What does that look like when the teacher at Key wants to stay with building because it's better for their commute etc? By law, do they have this choice? My vote is let them all be adults and make decisions for themselves, no dictating to teachers/staff what they HAVE to do.

How many adults do you know who can tell their employers where they will be working, and refuse to move when the rest of the office gets transferred?

Anonymous wrote:Let the record reflect that Key went down swinging. Fought the good fight.

Anonymous wrote:so 44% of Ashlawn moves and 33% of Taylor moves and 90% Mck to Reed while another 10% split up to respective schools?
sooooo is APS sending 44% of of Ashlawn staff to the new schools? Is APS staff sending 33% of Taylor staff to the new schools the students will attend? Mck?
Is this the plan for staff in these scenarios that people seem to talk so much about?
I'm really confused why staff are not treated as grown adults who can choose to go to whatever school they want? Including staying put if they so choose? If I'm not mistaken, APS cannot FORCE staff to do anything can they? If they were given a job at a building, can they keep it if they want? Take a teacher hired at Key Immersion, was his/her employment tied to the program or building? What does that look like when the teacher at Key wants to stay with building because it's better for their commute etc? By law, do they have this choice? My vote is let them all be adults and make decisions for themselves, no dictating to teachers/staff what they HAVE to do.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I move for reconsideration!

Based on what rationale?

Bad Data!

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I move for reconsideration!

Based on what rationale?