| Author | Post |
|---|
dadof3
Member
| Joined: | Fri Oct 26th, 2007 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 139 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Wed Feb 27th, 2008 11:13 pm |
|
| And how is that going?
|
Joewrites4rights
Member
| Joined: | Fri May 25th, 2007 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 295 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Wed Feb 27th, 2008 11:01 pm |
|
| RDG....good question....the recall petition doesn't involve the closed campus issue. It involves KK's blatant disrespect for the students and parents of this district. It involves her public displays of this disrespect and her negative public comments and actions of a governing board member. It involves her votes to only serve her best interests and not those of her constituents. This, plus her lack of leadership, is all spelled out on the recall papers, and that is what is being touted to signers. Joe Bernier
|
rdg7359
Member
| Joined: | Sun Feb 12th, 2006 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 135 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Wed Feb 27th, 2008 10:49 pm |
|
I will follow Adams advice and keep this topic within the correct thread...
I am curious as to what is being told to the people being asked to sign the recall petition that is going around.
The underlying agenda is that certain students and parents are not happy with the new closed campus policy. Recalling Ms. Knecht with any luck and electing someone that is opposed to the current policy and wanting to overturn it, is the ultimate outcome.
So with that, what is being told to the people being asked to sign this petition? Are they being told that they telling the truth? That is that they are not happy with the new policy because the parents of the students are having to go in everyday and sign their children out for that day, thus causing a major inconvenience. That the board no longer accepts "blanket" permission slips.
Or are the people being mislead into signing this petition with the understanding that "all parental rights" have been taken away? Which is not the case, no matter how you want to interpret the new policy, the parents can still allow their children to leave campus at lunch.
I would hope for this petition to have any validity that the signature gatherers are being truthful and not at all misleading and gathering signatures under false pretenses.
Last edited on Wed Feb 27th, 2008 10:51 pm by rdg7359
|
opie1970
Member
| Joined: | Thu Jan 10th, 2008 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 2 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Mon Feb 25th, 2008 02:39 am |
|
Well, I just got back from Tahiti  and was alarmed at the number of views on this thread. I am sorry to see the vitriol that feeds on itself among prosperous folks here...
I suppose I am to blame by starting this whole thread, so to all I am sorry I even played a part in generating such hatred toward each other to the point of attacking each others' essence. Please forgive my misstep.
What was intended as a light sarcasm in response to all the negativity I read in the paper became firebrands cast into bitter hay. That makes me out to be the madman here.
|
integrityforPUSD
Member
| Joined: | Wed Oct 24th, 2007 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 284 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Wed Jan 30th, 2008 09:16 pm |
|
AREYOUKIDDING ME wrote: According to Ms. Olguin, those involved have until 5 p.m. Wednesday, April 9 to file the 9,072 signatures needed to call for a recall of Ms. Knecht.
A big day in my life, Miss Kitty.
I know you agree with 97.9% of the things I put in here, you just don't care to admit it.
The bolded part is the 97% I agree with...
|
AREYOUKIDDING ME
Member
| Joined: | Sun Oct 28th, 2007 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 355 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Wed Jan 30th, 2008 08:32 pm |
|
According to Ms. Olguin, those involved have until 5 p.m. Wednesday, April 9 to file the 9,072 signatures needed to call for a recall of Ms. Knecht.
A big day in my life, Miss Kitty.
I know you agree with 97.9% of the things I put in here, you just don't care to admit it.
Last edited on Wed Jan 30th, 2008 08:34 pm by AREYOUKIDDING ME
|
integrityforPUSD
Member
| Joined: | Wed Oct 24th, 2007 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 284 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Wed Jan 30th, 2008 08:21 pm |
|
AREYOUKIDDING ME wrote: I'll be back April 9 at 5:00. Till then I'm off to Tahiti. I'm independently wealthy you know.
You must be independently wealthy to be online as much as you are. So, why April 9th and 5:00 PM no less?
BTW I like it you are needling everyone about the recall, that just puts a fire under them to accomplish the recall.
|
AREYOUKIDDING ME
Member
| Joined: | Sun Oct 28th, 2007 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 355 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Wed Jan 30th, 2008 07:19 pm |
|
| I'll be back April 9 at 5:00. Till then I'm off to Tahiti. I'm independently wealthy you know. Last edited on Wed Jan 30th, 2008 07:40 pm by AREYOUKIDDING ME
|
integrityforPUSD
Member
| Joined: | Wed Oct 24th, 2007 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 284 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Wed Jan 30th, 2008 06:50 pm |
|
| Are you going somewhere? Do you post on any other subjects? Personally, I don't.
|
AREYOUKIDDING ME
Member
| Joined: | Sun Oct 28th, 2007 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 355 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Wed Jan 30th, 2008 06:08 pm |
|
| See ya Miss Kitty
|
integrityforPUSD
Member
| Joined: | Wed Oct 24th, 2007 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 284 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Wed Jan 30th, 2008 05:58 pm |
|
|
AREYOUKIDDING ME
Member
| Joined: | Sun Oct 28th, 2007 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 355 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Wed Jan 30th, 2008 05:33 pm |
|
| Well I personally believe things aren't the same without you!
|
integrityforPUSD
Member
| Joined: | Wed Oct 24th, 2007 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 284 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Wed Jan 30th, 2008 05:30 pm |
|
| Looks the same to me!
|
AREYOUKIDDING ME
Member
| Joined: | Sun Oct 28th, 2007 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 355 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Wed Jan 30th, 2008 04:30 pm |
|
| Well things just aren't the same without you
|
integrityforPUSD
Member
| Joined: | Wed Oct 24th, 2007 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 284 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Wed Jan 30th, 2008 04:20 pm |
|
| I didn't go anywhere, I just haven't seen anything all that earth shattering posted here. No new arguments...no new thoughts...etc.
|
AREYOUKIDDING ME
Member
| Joined: | Sun Oct 28th, 2007 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 355 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Wed Jan 30th, 2008 04:07 pm |
|
Miss Kitty
Where have you been? I really missed you...
|
integrityforPUSD
Member
| Joined: | Wed Oct 24th, 2007 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 284 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Wed Jan 30th, 2008 03:58 pm |
|
| Yourareajoke, it would help if you were to say things such as "I personally believe," because Joe is not and has not offended everyone. You are making assumptions about people, you are assuming everyone is or has been offended by the things that Joe Bernier has said, when there are probably a lot of people that are not offended at all. The two or three people that are posting against Joe doesn't add up to the vast majority.
|
Joewrites4rights
Member
| Joined: | Fri May 25th, 2007 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 295 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Wed Jan 30th, 2008 03:34 pm |
|
| RUKidding....I do understand that has occurred for some...maybe even a lot of people...really I do. Joe
|
AREYOUKIDDING ME
Member
| Joined: | Sun Oct 28th, 2007 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 355 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Wed Jan 30th, 2008 03:02 pm |
|
| That is what you're not grasping. Your methods got in the way of your message....
|
Joewrites4rights
Member
| Joined: | Fri May 25th, 2007 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 295 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Wed Jan 30th, 2008 02:43 pm |
|
| RUKidding....I appreciate your response....I really do. But please remember....I am not the one who divided this community...the board members did that. I just stuck up for myself and others, and although you and others may view my "ways" as strong and "freight train like"....I have never been in this position before, and I am not going to waste time playing politics....I am always direct and brutally honest. I am not the delicate and graceful type. I have never pretended to be. If you recall....the board was also "freight train" like and totally irresponsible with their policy implementation when they removed parental permission. They even violated their own "creation and changing" policy in doing so. Plus (remember then, the policy didn't allow even for parents to pick up their kids for lunch, and doctors appointments had to be verified and approved BEFORE removing your student from the campus....that's also initially the time I was quoting the constitution....remember those days) you seem to have conveniently forgotten that.....and you have always avoided any engagement of the subject matter at hand and questions I have had of you about the reasons you think my points are invalid. Joe Bernier Last edited on Wed Jan 30th, 2008 02:45 pm by Joewrites4rights
|
AREYOUKIDDING ME
Member
| Joined: | Sun Oct 28th, 2007 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 355 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Wed Jan 30th, 2008 01:56 pm |
|
Joewrites4rights wrote: RUKidding....you have asked many people for their opinions of what I have said in the past.....but you have yet to even answer any of your own questions. Please enlighten us with your ways. And don't just give us the "Joe is way out there routine"....tell us how why YOU think the things I have brought up are irrelevant. Tell us why you feel these reasons should be ignored by the board and the closers. Please tell us (in your opinion) if these reasons are not relevant here and now.....then when and where should we to reference to them. Why do they exist if not to be used in this type of situation? I'm so anxious to hear your valid reasons for once. Joe Bernier
It's very quite simple, Joe. This whole affair started by you with the closed campuses was unneeded and did nothing but divide this community. The two candidates for the school board said they were going to close the campuses and they did. The voters voted for them and you decided to create havoc because of this decision. I'm not going into your bizarre scanarios regarding kidnapping, unconstitutional, prison, etc. again because they have been covered way too much, but none of it made a bit of sense and your credibility soon sank to zero with me.
How would have I done it if I were Joe Bernier and the closed campus decision really upset me?? Very simple. I would have waited till the November election and campaigned for the candidates that supported the open lunch policy. Because, basically, that is what's going to happen anyway. If the recall is successful, all you really are going to sccomplish is to receive a pound of flesh for the sins against your daughter. If you would have brought up the issue in a calm and coherent manner, you would have been a sympathetic figure. Instead, you came on like a freight train and people like me resent it very much.
Last edited on Wed Jan 30th, 2008 02:03 pm by AREYOUKIDDING ME
|
Frank1234
Member
| Joined: | Fri Dec 15th, 2006 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 62 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Wed Jan 30th, 2008 05:23 am |
|
Joe, if you are online, email me.
Frank
|
Joewrites4rights
Member
| Joined: | Fri May 25th, 2007 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 295 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Wed Jan 30th, 2008 05:18 am |
|
| RUKidding....you have asked many people for their opinions of what I have said in the past.....but you have yet to even answer any of your own questions. Please enlighten us with your ways. And don't just give us the "Joe is way out there routine"....tell us how why YOU think the things I have brought up are irrelevant. Tell us why you feel these reasons should be ignored by the board and the closers. Please tell us (in your opinion) if these reasons are not relevant here and now.....then when and where should we to reference to them. Why do they exist if not to be used in this type of situation? I'm so anxious to hear your valid reasons for once. Joe Bernier
|
Peoria Dad
Member
| Joined: | Thu Jan 5th, 2006 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 126 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Wed Jan 30th, 2008 01:58 am |
|
AREYOUKIDDING ME wrote: HMMM This was interesting....I never thought about this..
If you’re unable to back up your words with enough valid signatures, or win the election, you pretty much give the person you’re aiming at the right to claim they have the community’s support. And, after winning two elections, they can more than make the case that they do.
Now where have I read this before . . . oh yeah, here: http://nohoneymoon.blogspot.com/2007/12/childrens-crusade.html
|
AREYOUKIDDING ME
Member
| Joined: | Sun Oct 28th, 2007 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 355 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Tue Jan 29th, 2008 11:06 pm |
|
HMMM This was interesting....I never thought about this..
If you’re unable to back up your words with enough valid signatures, or win the election, you pretty much give the person you’re aiming at the right to claim they have the community’s support. And, after winning two elections, they can more than make the case that they do.
|
AREYOUKIDDING ME
Member
| Joined: | Sun Oct 28th, 2007 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 355 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Tue Jan 29th, 2008 05:44 pm |
|
activepeorian wrote: Sometimes I feel like saying, "what a dumb thing to bring up" but just as in civil conversation (and being the southern girl I am) I certainly wouldn't say that.
Constitutional Rights, ARS 15-341, Kidnapping, Columbine, prison life and the Pledge of Allegiance
Veda
I know Joe is friend and supporter of yours, but could you comment on this? Anyhting you want to say is okay...
|
Joewrites4rights
Member
| Joined: | Fri May 25th, 2007 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 295 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Tue Jan 29th, 2008 03:52 pm |
|
Rdg....you and me are different. And I am good with that. I only wish you were good with the diversity we all have as well. You may be willing to just let things go, and cower down to the "powers that be"...even when they are creating policies outside their boundaries and into yours.....but I am not the type of person to let things go that should be fixed. That would not be the action of a good citizen.
The closers didn't wait until the school year ended and let things go before they thought to control other's. I'm not even advocating the control of other's. What I am advocating for is the respect of each student and their parent's own decision making capabilities. What you are advocating for is the thoughtless control of the students and parents lives. Huge difference....For simply waiting until the end of the school year will not solve the problem....it will still be there next year as well, and as we have seen over time....things just keep getting worse as long as nobody steps up to stop it. Joe Bernier
|
rdg7359
Member
| Joined: | Sun Feb 12th, 2006 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 135 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Tue Jan 29th, 2008 02:50 pm |
|
rdg7359 wrote: Joewrites4rights wrote: RUKidding....my post simply stated what I thought the current school lunches resembled the most. Please enlighten us with your thoughts of what you think the current lunch conditions resemble.
Where else have you seen 25-30 minute daily lines for food. Let alone the same 2-5 choices of food? Where else have you seen or heard of forced restricted areas to eat lunch, with "guards" swirling around you? Where else have you heard of "don't cross the red line"? Where else have you heard "if you want the student (prisoner) released you must be "approved by the authorities of the state" (this policy says parents ONLY....not someone approved by the parent, i.e. grandparent or an older sibling) and that person, the one "approved by the authorities of the state" (not the person approved by the parent) MUST come in each and every single time in order for the student to be released for lunch. If they are not prisoners....why are they (and us as parents) being treated like this? What else is there to compare it to? I've searched many things and places.....but you must obviously know of something I missed....so lets hear it....I want to learn more. Joe Bernier
Congratulations!
What you have described above, is every public high school in every state of the country. When you and I went to school, it was the same scenario. We stood in line and we had a selection of 3 or so choices, where was the outcry then? If you are looking for a better environment then you need to look into private schools or take your own lunch. If you are going to place blame, place it on our government, which continues to cut public school funding and the relevance of those cuts are felt all across the country, not just the PUSD.
The issue that I have with your continued argument is it is all over the map. When this topic first came to the surface it was about lunch. It is still about lunch and has always been about lunch no matter how you have tried to spin it. Through your desperation to make your point you have thrown ridiculous scenarios out to see if anything grabbed hold. To recap: Constitutional Rights, ARS 15-341, Kidnapping, Columbine and the Pledge of Allegiance. I may have forgotten one or two, there has been so many.
Closed high school campuses exist in many states and in many cities across the country. Why has it not been brought up or overturned before by other school districts about parents Constitutional rights being violated? Where has a school districts closed campus policy ever been overturned by a court because Constitutional law were violated? How about state laws? Where are the examples of closed campus policies being overturned because a parents rights had been taken away due to closed campuses on a state level? The only thing I have seen you or any one of your followers provide for proof is someone's BLOG. Everybody knows that a BLOG is mostly based on someone's opinion and not necessarily based on fact.
You appear to be an intelligent man, you know that every written policy, whether in business or on a district level, someone, somewhere feels their rights are being violated. You know that no laws have been violated you feel slighted because you are now inconvenienced by the new policy. Which I might add that the current policy is a result of a compromise with the board as previously stated on this topic. Why was there a compromise reached if no one is happy with it.
If this is in fact a safety issue, as you have so implied. Then why are you not advocating for metal detectors at every entrance and exit? Why not have all students have see-through backpacks, purses, etc? Most of your big businesses practice this policy, (there’s that word policy again) what about the privacy rights of those individuals?
You can spin this topic any way you like if it makes you and your handful of followers feel better at the end of the day, but there is no violation in this policy. What are you prepared to do if your recall fails? I can literally see you and your followers demonstrating the biggest temper tantrum at the next board meeting. I can see you throwing yourselves down on the floor and holding your breath and kicking your feet and yelling and screaming.
Could it be that you have made such a mockery out of this topic and conducted yourself in such a manner at the board meetings no one is listening to your redundant ramblings anymore? Face it, the way you have conducted yourself at the board meetings, in the press and on this website, no wonder no one is listening. The way you have conducted yourself in these message boards proves the point.
All over a 40 minute lunch break. Give me a break!
As stated before " You are circumventing the truth with illusion"
Someone, somewhere is always going to feel that their "rights" are being violated by a companies, school districts and any other entities policies.
On the bright side of things, the school year will be over in a few months and your child can stay home all day!
|
Joewrites4rights
Member
| Joined: | Fri May 25th, 2007 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 295 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Tue Jan 29th, 2008 02:19 pm |
|
rdg....parental permission vs. a DAILY in person sign out. There is a huge difference.
BTW....to be crystal clear about this....the policy does NOT require or state the need for a DAILY, in person, sign out. The policy only states that the parent need to go in person to sign out their student for their assigned lunch period. That is exactly what I did.....I made it crystal clear that I wanted my daughter to be allowed to leave for lunch, on her assigned lunch period for (i.e.) Jan 28th, Jan 29th,, Jan 30th etc. I did....literally, follow the policy, word for word. But then, somehow, that wasn't good enough for the 3 board members.....they then "added" other meanings to the words in the policy that are not there, it's not even open for interpretation....the words just aren't in the policy....why? Why do they (and you) insist on a stupid "DAILY" sign out that is no where to be found in the policy. They are going to have a very hard time enforcing this. Joe Bernier
|
rdg7359
Member
| Joined: | Sun Feb 12th, 2006 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 135 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Tue Jan 29th, 2008 12:36 pm |
|
No_mood wrote:
What's wrong No_mood...did you have second thoughts of dazzling us with some more of your brilliant commentary?
|
No_mood
Member
| Joined: | Fri Jun 9th, 2006 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 95 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Tue Jan 29th, 2008 12:12 pm |
|
Last edited on Tue Jan 29th, 2008 12:14 pm by No_mood
|
No_mood
Member
| Joined: | Fri Jun 9th, 2006 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 95 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Tue Jan 29th, 2008 12:10 pm |
|
Last edited on Tue Jan 29th, 2008 12:13 pm by No_mood
|
rdg7359
Member
| Joined: | Sun Feb 12th, 2006 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 135 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Tue Jan 29th, 2008 12:05 pm |
|
Joewrites4rights wrote: rdg....we do not have parental permission in the current policy. For if we did, I could grant the school my permission to release my daughter to come home for lunch, AS I HAVE DONE....and they would allow that to happen. That's parental permission. The district has openly chosen to NOT ALLOW PARENTAL PERMISSION.
What we do have is the school district (3 board members) demanding that we must go in and sign our student out for lunch.
Do you understand the difference? Joe Bernier
I am confused by your statement.
Under the new policy, you as a parent, can give parental permission for your child to leave campus at lunch. This is done by going to the school and signing them out on the day they wish to leave.
Why is that not considered parental permission in your eyes or Peoriadad's eyes?
If parental permission was "NOT ALLOWED" as you state, then your child would not be allowed to leave campus at any time regardless of parental permission or not. Which is not the case under this new policy.
|
Joewrites4rights
Member
| Joined: | Fri May 25th, 2007 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 295 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Tue Jan 29th, 2008 12:57 am |
|
rdg....we do not have parental permission in the current policy. For if we did, I could grant the school my permission to release my daughter to come home for lunch, AS I HAVE DONE....and they would allow that to happen. That's parental permission. The district has openly chosen to NOT ALLOW PARENTAL PERMISSION.
What we do have is the school district (3 board members) demanding that we must go in and sign our student out for lunch.
Do you understand the difference? Joe Bernier
|
Peoria Dad
Member
| Joined: | Thu Jan 5th, 2006 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 126 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Mon Jan 28th, 2008 11:23 pm |
|
The current policy is not a compromise at all.
Last year we were required to attend an orientation, watch a safety video and sign a release form to allow our kids to leave campus at lunch. If students disobeyed the rules, they were no longer allowed to leave campus, even with parent permission. That was a compromise (and one that was working well, I should add).
This year, if we wish to allow our young adults to leave campus at lunch we have to drop off a permission slip every day, in person. Here's the funny thing: If we want to have our young adults released from campus for any reason other than lunch, we can simply call it in to the attendance office. Does that make sense to anyone here?
As I said, this is not compromise, but it is intentionally inconvenient and unreasonable.Last edited on Mon Jan 28th, 2008 11:25 pm by Peoria Dad
|
rdg7359
Member
| Joined: | Sun Feb 12th, 2006 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 135 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Mon Jan 28th, 2008 11:14 pm |
|
Peoria Dad wrote: RDG, there is a huge difference in being able to sign them out as per last year's policy, than in having to go in to the school office every day. It was set up to be intentionally inconvenient and unreasonable.
If you're going to set up a strawman, then you need to do better.
It has been stated here many times that the current policy was the result of a compromise of some sort. Can you verify this?
|
Adam Maras
Member
|
Posted: Mon Jan 28th, 2008 11:11 pm |
|
AREYOUKIDDING ME wrote: Are you related to Chicken Little
No, but nonetheless, I don't want the sky to fall on me.
|
AREYOUKIDDING ME
Member
| Joined: | Sun Oct 28th, 2007 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 355 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Mon Jan 28th, 2008 11:10 pm |
|
| Are you related to Chicken Little
|
Adam Maras
Member
|
Posted: Mon Jan 28th, 2008 11:08 pm |
|
dadof3 wrote: Are you adding can't finish the IB program to the reasons closed campuses are bad?
Of course not; read on.
Far be it from me to spread rumors, but word is going around that certain people may be interested in moving PUSD high schools back to traditional scheduling. Not that there's anything wrong with that type of scheduling; however, it would (I have been informed) essentially ruin the IB program here.
Would you put it past our Board to make such a decision?
|
AREYOUKIDDING ME
Member
| Joined: | Sun Oct 28th, 2007 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 355 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Mon Jan 28th, 2008 11:07 pm |
|
| Yes, this is certainly a new angle
|
Adam Maras
Member
|
Posted: Mon Jan 28th, 2008 11:05 pm |
|
AREYOUKIDDING ME wrote: Actually, my daughter probably would have liked it. She was always looking for a way to get out of that program....study,study,study
I think you get my point, though.
|
dadof3
Member
| Joined: | Fri Oct 26th, 2007 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 139 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Mon Jan 28th, 2008 11:05 pm |
|
| Are you adding can't finish the IB program to the reasons closed campuses are bad?
|
AREYOUKIDDING ME
Member
| Joined: | Sun Oct 28th, 2007 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 355 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Mon Jan 28th, 2008 11:01 pm |
|
| Actually, my daughter probably would have liked it. She was always looking for a way to get out of that program....study,study,study
|
Adam Maras
Member
|
Posted: Mon Jan 28th, 2008 10:58 pm |
|
AREYOUKIDDING ME wrote: International Baccalaureate
Yes, I thought I was missing an 'e'. Thank you for finding it for me.
I answered your questions earlier in the forum; why don't you answer mine?
|
AREYOUKIDDING ME
Member
| Joined: | Sun Oct 28th, 2007 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 355 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Mon Jan 28th, 2008 10:57 pm |
|
| International Baccalaureate
|
Adam Maras
Member
|
Posted: Mon Jan 28th, 2008 10:55 pm |
|
AREYOUKIDDING ME wrote: My oldest graduated from North Canyon from the IB program - you must have ESP
What would you think if the PVUSD Governing Board had made a whim decision during your high schooler's Junior year that prevented them from completing the IB program, and ended up leaving them in a place where they could have trouble scheduling out the remainder of their high school career in a way that will let them graduate?
Somehow I have a feeling you wouldn't like that very much (not to mention your high schooler).
|
Peoria Dad
Member
| Joined: | Thu Jan 5th, 2006 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 126 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Mon Jan 28th, 2008 10:54 pm |
|
So you live in the Paradise Valley district . . . which allows juniors and seniors to leave campus everyday so long as they get parent permission at the beginnng of the year (sound familiar?).
|
AREYOUKIDDING ME
Member
| Joined: | Sun Oct 28th, 2007 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 355 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Mon Jan 28th, 2008 10:51 pm |
|
| My oldest graduated from North Canyon from the IB program - you must have ESP
|
Adam Maras
Member
|
Posted: Mon Jan 28th, 2008 10:50 pm |
|
AREYOUKIDDING ME wrote: Dos, padrecito
Are they part of the International Baccalaureat program?
|
AREYOUKIDDING ME
Member
| Joined: | Sun Oct 28th, 2007 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 355 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Mon Jan 28th, 2008 10:49 pm |
|
| Dos, padrecito
|
Current time is 01:31 am | Page: 1 2 3 4 5   |
|