Anonymous wrote:The board testimony is online and i think already linked to-- go find it.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think we heard that all from Dr. Sheers at the work session.

I also think the poster was thinking about the emotional toll it will take on a cluster two child in her class for the next five months if that child is aware that the teacher testified that she wanted that child to leave the school. Kids don't get it. They don't understand renovation queues and zoning. They don't comprehend the nuances behind all of this. And that is where the difficulty lies.

So, be kind. On both sides of the issue.

My child (who is past 3rd grade now and didn't have that teacher for homeroom) was watching with me last night. She was so excited when that teacher stepped up to the podium. Then, about halfway through, when she realized what the teacher was saying, she started crying. It was really heartbreaking for her to watch a teacher and that line up of parents. My fault, I guess. I shouldn't have watched it in front of her. I have been so involved and it took me away from my kids so often, that I thought it would be cool for her to see what I had been working on and to see the democratic process. In retrospect, she may not have been ready for that.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I have no dog in this hunt--but I think the teacher could have conveyed her opinion to the school board members without public testimony.
As a teacher, I too have opinions. But, she should have been more considerate of her students.

Parents, too, should be more considerate of their own emotions. The children will survive.

And, for the record, I thought that Schultz's amendment deserved a little more consideration. In my opinion, the students would be better off in a building annex than in trailers. Years ago, I taught in an annex. It was far from perfect, but it was fine. It might not have been the best solution, but it was a creative one that deserved a little more thought. Strauss NEVER requires anything of staff--and staff always chooses the easiest way.

Go away. You obviously have a dog in the hunt, and what Schultz proposed was discussed at length at both the work session and prior to last night's meeting. It garnered very little support, and was specifically opposed by both the Haycock and Lemon Road principals and hundreds of families. It was not simply Janie Strauss's relying on what someone at Gatehouse told her.

Why do you assume she is involved in the fight. She says she isn't. Do you think that if someone disagrees with you they MUST be biased? There is a lot of room for disagreement on these issues, which is part of why this has been discussed so much by the board.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I have no dog in this hunt--but I think the teacher could have conveyed her opinion to the school board members without public testimony.
As a teacher, I too have opinions. But, she should have been more considerate of her students.

Parents, too, should be more considerate of their own emotions. The children will survive.

And, for the record, I thought that Schultz's amendment deserved a little more consideration. In my opinion, the students would be better off in a building annex than in trailers. Years ago, I taught in an annex. It was far from perfect, but it was fine. It might not have been the best solution, but it was a creative one that deserved a little more thought. Strauss NEVER requires anything of staff--and staff always chooses the easiest way.

Go away. You obviously have a dog in the hunt, and what Schultz proposed was discussed at length at both the work session and prior to last night's meeting. It garnered very little support, and was specifically opposed by both the Haycock and Lemon Road principals and hundreds of families. It was not simply Janie Strauss's relying on what someone at Gatehouse told her.

Anonymous wrote:I have no dog in this hunt--but I think the teacher could have conveyed her opinion to the school board members without public testimony.
As a teacher, I too have opinions. But, she should have been more considerate of her students.

Parents, too, should be more considerate of their own emotions. The children will survive.

And, for the record, I thought that Schultz's amendment deserved a little more consideration. In my opinion, the students would be better off in a building annex than in trailers. Years ago, I taught in an annex. It was far from perfect, but it was fine. It might not have been the best solution, but it was a creative one that deserved a little more thought. Strauss NEVER requires anything of staff--and staff always chooses the easiest way.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Yes, that shouting neighborhood group of parents has really wrecked our school's community feeling, even among neighborhood families.

I am afraid that this is true. For what it's worth, I supported grandfathering because I think the first priority should be taking care of all of our community. I am in boundary and my kids are younger, are not best friends with out of boundary AAP kids, so I am not personally affected by their departure. However, they are part of our community as much as any in boundary kids. We truly lose by losing them--they are very much what makes Haycock special. I don't pretend to know the answers. I just want to say to the Cluster 2 parents that I am very sorry.

Anonymous wrote:I have no dog in this hunt--but I think the teacher could have conveyed her opinion to the school board members without public testimony.
As a teacher, I too have opinions. But, she should have been more considerate of her students.

Parents, too, should be more considerate of their own emotions. The children will survive.

And, for the record, I thought that Schultz's amendment deserved a little more consideration. In my opinion, the students would be better off in a building annex than in trailers. Years ago, I taught in an annex. It was far from perfect, but it was fine. It might not have been the best solution, but it was a creative one that deserved a little more thought. Strauss NEVER requires anything of staff--and staff always chooses the easiest way.

Anonymous wrote:I think we heard that all from Dr. Sheers at the work session.

I also think the poster was thinking about the emotional toll it will take on a cluster two child in her class for the next five months if that child is aware that the teacher testified that she wanted that child to leave the school. Kids don't get it. They don't understand renovation queues and zoning. They don't comprehend the nuances behind all of this. And that is where the difficulty lies.

So, be kind. On both sides of the issue.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:She is a McLean resident and I believe her kids went to Haycock. She is as entitled as the rest of us to her opinion, even though I don't agree with her. I had a few teachers write the board on the behalf of the cluster two students, but did not announce their views in public. The hard part for me would be if my child was in her class.

My child IS in her class. I was astonished last night to see her stand, and am literally feeling sick today that my son has to spend the rest of the school year with a teacher who has publicly declared that he is unvalued and unwanted at his current school.

If you are for real, and not a troll, you should consider getting some professional help. If you bothered to read her testimony, you'd see that she said nothing of the kind. It must be horrible to literally feel sick for no valid reason.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:She is a McLean resident and I believe her kids went to Haycock. She is as entitled as the rest of us to her opinion, even though I don't agree with her. I had a few teachers write the board on the behalf of the cluster two students, but did not announce their views in public. The hard part for me would be if my child was in her class.

My child IS in her class. I was astonished last night to see her stand, and am literally feeling sick today that my son has to spend the rest of the school year with a teacher who has publicly declared that he is unvalued and unwanted at his current school.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:She is a McLean resident and I believe her kids went to Haycock. She is as entitled as the rest of us to her opinion, even though I don't agree with her. I had a few teachers write the board on the behalf of the cluster two students, but did not announce their views in public. The hard part for me would be if my child was in her class.

My child IS in her class. I was astonished last night to see her stand, and am literally feeling sick today that my son has to spend the rest of the school year with a teacher who has publicly declared that he is unvalued and unwanted at his current school.

Anonymous wrote:I'm sure the teacher's concerns she voiced on the overcrowding were lead by her personal interest in removing your son because he is unvalued and unwanted.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:She is a McLean resident and I believe her kids went to Haycock. She is as entitled as the rest of us to her opinion, even though I don't agree with her. I had a few teachers write the board on the behalf of the cluster two students, but did not announce their views in public. The hard part for me would be if my child was in her class.

My child IS in her class. I was astonished last night to see her stand, and am literally feeling sick today that my son has to spend the rest of the school year with a teacher who has publicly declared that he is unvalued and unwanted at his current school.