Anonymous wrote:Point of clarification:

This is California, right?

Are these board members speaking of low income parents of black and brown kids? Or Bay Area tech dads and moms?

...because that difference matters. At least to me it does.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Yikes. My boss always insists on being careful what we say, even in private. A wise policy.

Although I kind of agree with the teachers.

Anyone who agrees with the teachers should not be anywhere near education. If you devalue education so much that you refer to it as babysitting, are willing to joke about students' families as lazy potheads (this is probably what the teacher PP above talking about her "low-income Hispanic" students does), and want to threaten the families, you should not be near children, regardless of whether a mic is on.

I mean I guess I am not surprised some of you support this behavior. But it's vile.

I hope that when some of these commenters are saying they agree with the teachers they really mean they empathize with the teachers.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Dear teacher who refers to students as "Hispanic," let me explain to you why you should refer to us as Latino/a. I'm about to do some emotional labor here, which I'm 99% sure you're going to ignore because you think your familiarity with us gives you some kind of authority.

Hispanic and Latino are often conflated. They are not the same. Hispanic refers to the language and Latino refers to the culture. If you have indigenous students in your classes (and if you have any from central America, you almost certainly do), these are Latinos, not Hispanics. Some of them may even speak Spanish, as is common in Guatemala, but that's the language of the colonizers. Brazilians are Latinos, not Hispanics. I can go on. This is just like how we don't call all Alaska Natives "Inuit" anymore.

Aside from mislabeling people with a moniker that refers to a particular language, "Hispanic" also refers to the colonizing culture. Many Latinos find it offensive for this reason.

I'm not going to get into Latinx. I don't understand it.

DP. Why is there a Hispanic/Latino category on tons of applications? Also, isn’t Latino also kind of a misnomer because indigenous students have very little to do with Ancient Rome and Latin?

Well this is a new and dumb argument. Amazing.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Yikes. My boss always insists on being careful what we say, even in private. A wise policy.

Although I kind of agree with the teachers.

Anyone who agrees with the teachers should not be anywhere near education. If you devalue education so much that you refer to it as babysitting, are willing to joke about students' families as lazy potheads (this is probably what the teacher PP above talking about her "low-income Hispanic" students does), and want to threaten the families, you should not be near children, regardless of whether a mic is on.

I mean I guess I am not surprised some of you support this behavior. But it's vile.

Anonymous wrote:Yikes. My boss always insists on being careful what we say, even in private. A wise policy.

Although I kind of agree with the teachers.

Anonymous wrote:Yikes. My boss always insists on being careful what we say, even in private. A wise policy.

Although I kind of agree with the teachers.

Anonymous wrote:Point of clarification:

This is California, right?

Are these board members speaking of low income parents of black and brown kids? Or Bay Area tech dads and moms?

...because that difference matters. At least to me it does.

Anonymous wrote:This is the school board, not a group of teachers, FYI. Not sure how this turned into another “teachers hate students and don’t do their jobs” thread, but here we are.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's funny because it is the wealthy white parents who seem to want their babysitting back more than the low income Hispanics.

No. Thar is just the rhetoric the unions are putting forth, but as you can see from this example, Latino parents are extremely concerned about the total loss of education as well.

That having been said, I do think white voices are dominating the conversation. They dominate the union rhetoric too.

Anonymous wrote:Point of clarification:

This is California, right?

Are these board members speaking of low income parents of black and brown kids? Or Bay Area tech dads and moms?

...because that difference matters. At least to me it does.

Anonymous wrote:Point of clarification:

This is California, right?

Are these board members speaking of low income parents of black and brown kids? Or Bay Area tech dads and moms?

...because that difference matters. At least to me it does.

Anonymous wrote:Point of clarification:

This is California, right?

Are these board members speaking of low income parents of black and brown kids? Or Bay Area tech dads and moms?

...because that difference matters. At least to me it does.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Shameful for these school officials to mock their own constituents like that. They have lost all moral authority in my eyes. Good luck getting me to vote for another school bond proposal!

I think school bond proposals will be failing all over this country in the coming years.

Never again, Fairfax County. Although I think the enrollment drop will obviate the need.

Ha! Where will they get money for all farms/ESOL students coming shortly after the immigration reform bill is signed?

Not my problem. Some Title 1 finding. Bigger classes for teachers. My kids a junior then out. But I’m not forgiving or forgetting. No bond vote from me.