From an average TAS parent’s perspective, who, until recently, did not think twice about the school board’s activities…
I had complete trust in a parent-run school board due to our same vested interest – our kids.
Right now, I do not understand the thinking process that went into changing our school to an elite private school. TAS started out as a community school. The only reason I can think of is the oft-referenced drama of 2006 that resulted in the school almost losing its accreditation. I only know it has something to do with parents having too much influence and affecting the superintendent’s job. I also heard that that superintendent was not cut out for the job. That’s all I know.
So, is it then, in order to avoid a repeat of said incident that the board has been slowing steering TAS in the direction of a private school where parents have no say in how the school is run? With all its benefits, privately-run schools are not without its disadvantages. Were the pros and cons adequately presented to the parents (the TAS foundation members) before the decision of changing the very structure of this school was made? Right now, almost all parents do not know that the school board has dissolved the TAS foundation, and with it, the voting rights and voices of all fee-paying parents. The board alone now controls ALL the assets of the TAS Foundation, and they can do anything they want with it. The board members would say that it was made public. This would be true. But it was made public in the most secretive of ways: hidden in the board meeting minutes that parents would have to log-in to the school website to find. Normal, busy parents usually would not be going through these minutes unless they have reason to do so. Nevertheless, this is what the board means when it says everything is transparent.
So, in a way, all us parents must shoulder some blame. We were too complacent. We did not think anything would be amiss. We did not think that the advertised
A
Anonymous
5 years ago
From an average TAS parent’s perspective, who, until recently, did not think twice about the school board’s activities…
I had complete trust in a parent-run school board due to our same vested interest – our kids.
Right now, I do not understand the thinking process that went into changing our school to an elite private school. TAS started out as a community school. The only reason I can think of is the oft-referenced drama of 2006 that resulted in the school almost losing its accreditation. I only know it has something to do with parents having too much influence and affecting the superintendent’s job. I also heard that that superintendent was not cut out for the job. That’s all I know.
So, is it then, in order to avoid a repeat of said incident that the board has been slowing steering TAS in the direction of a private school where parents have no say in how the school is run? With all its benefits, privately-run schools are not without its disadvantages. Were the pros and cons adequately presented to the parents (the TAS foundation members) before the decision of changing the very structure of this school was made? Right now, almost all parents do not know that the school board has dissolved the TAS foundation, and with it, the voting rights and voices of all fee-paying parents. The board alone now controls ALL the assets of the TAS Foundation, and they can do anything they want with it. The board members would say that it was made public. This would be true. But it was made public in the most secretive of ways: hidden in the board meeting minutes that parents would have to log-in to the school website to find. Normal, busy parents usually would not be going through these minutes unless they have reason to do so. Nevertheless, this is what the board means when it says everything is transparent.
So, in a way, all us parents must shoulder some blame. We were too complacent. We did not think anything would be amiss. We did not think that the advertised
X
xasfvDcRSnzMoZiJ
5 years ago
HYPfDXyQpeoir
L
Lily Yao
5 years ago
"Hennessy responded. Now she's gone. The new Head is meeting with groups of parents. And the students who were disciplined can come back to TAS next school year. So what's still the point of all this?"
To me, I do not feel what has been raised by this petition has been addressed.
Dr. Hennessy responded, with a lot of words, but without transparency or clarity.
She's gone, but the issues still exist.
The punishments that were summarily given were viewed too harsh by all but a few when taken in full context.
Will anyone at school ever acknowledge that, in light of what happened, perhaps the current disciplinary process should be reviewed more closely and revisited, to prevent something similar repeating itself in the future.
And with that in mind, for the students who were disciplined, has the school guaranteed they will be back at TAS next year? And if so, how will they be supported to make sure this year of uncertainty and learning disruption will not become a handicap in the rest of their high school experience and beyond.
No, it wasn't one of my kids who was directly impacted by this video incident or its aftermath. But, I believe my kids' impression and experience as they are going through school have been affected.
"All men make mistakes, but a good man yields when he knows his course is wrong, and repairs the evil. The only crime is pride." -- Sophocles, Antigone (The Theban Plays, #3)
A
Anonymous Parent
5 years ago
Hennessy responded. Now she's gone. The new Head is meeting with groups of parents. And the students who were disciplined can come back to TAS next school year. So what's still the point of all this?
L
Lily Yao
5 years ago
Adam Nelson, the new Interim Deputy Head of School, first joined TAS as Assistant to the Superintendent (Hennessy) for Special Projects. And while he has taken on various roles and titles over the years, the common knowledge is he was primarily acting on certain interests of Dr. Hennessy.
A simpler question is why an American school would allow someone so visible to the outside use a misleading “Dr.” title and ask to be addressed as Dr. Nelson. Local Taiwan convention does not address lawyers with a ‘professor’ or ‘doctor’ title. So is it because Adam being in Taiwan feels the locals are gullible? Or he needs the title to feel a sense of superiority over others?
—-
Professional titles
Trust me, I'm a doctor of law
Should you call an American lawyer, a juris doctor, "Doctor"?
Mar 1st 2013, The Economist
BY S.A.P. | LOS ANGELES
A LAWYER, a professor, and a physician walk into a bar. As they (predictably) begin to argue over drinks, the lawyer leans over the table and pulls out his trump card: “I'm right. Trust me, I’m a doctor.” The professor and physician are left speechless.
The lawyer isn’t wrong, strictly speaking. The American law degree is the Juris Doctor, literally “doctor of law”. The change from LLB (bachelor of laws) and LLM (master of laws) reflected a different approach to legal education stateside. As the modern incarnation of an older European doctorate, the new JD was intended to provide only professional preparation as a follow-up to a primary degree, usually from a liberal arts program. JDs were confined to the United States until about 15 years ago. JD programs have been popping up in other countries since.
The translation of the degree name is clear, but more sticky is whether a lawyer can properly refer to himself as a doctor. In America, “doctor” is commonly reserved for medical doctors and academics who hold a PhD (doctor of philosophy) degree. Holders of EdD (doctor of education) or PsyD (doctor of psychology)
L
Lily Yao
5 years ago
Featured
What is the appeal process when I feel an unjust disciplinary decision has been made? Why doesn’t the school care to put a formal, systematic appeal process in place to understand student, parent or even faculty grievances?
Hello. And Bye. https://zootovaryvsem.org/
cpoBWkZrfwFmbny
XyhBuKEtwA
yQwNRPWDKv
ZrDvJMhaR
anXTJfviSRqrKxE
yQkEexOjDvA
hAwQvbkEiOomRqSz
RZdPsnqpTCONxKBH
GFHVmMIsXTolv
nJZrgavYwcyNuI
GyxBCKhOwJiQzce
rFDqsYmCnIkaMj
From an average TAS parent’s perspective, who, until recently, did not think twice about the school board’s activities… I had complete trust in a parent-run school board due to our same vested interest – our kids. Right now, I do not understand the thinking process that went into changing our school to an elite private school. TAS started out as a community school. The only reason I can think of is the oft-referenced drama of 2006 that resulted in the school almost losing its accreditation. I only know it has something to do with parents having too much influence and affecting the superintendent’s job. I also heard that that superintendent was not cut out for the job. That’s all I know. So, is it then, in order to avoid a repeat of said incident that the board has been slowing steering TAS in the direction of a private school where parents have no say in how the school is run? With all its benefits, privately-run schools are not without its disadvantages. Were the pros and cons adequately presented to the parents (the TAS foundation members) before the decision of changing the very structure of this school was made? Right now, almost all parents do not know that the school board has dissolved the TAS foundation, and with it, the voting rights and voices of all fee-paying parents. The board alone now controls ALL the assets of the TAS Foundation, and they can do anything they want with it. The board members would say that it was made public. This would be true. But it was made public in the most secretive of ways: hidden in the board meeting minutes that parents would have to log-in to the school website to find. Normal, busy parents usually would not be going through these minutes unless they have reason to do so. Nevertheless, this is what the board means when it says everything is transparent. So, in a way, all us parents must shoulder some blame. We were too complacent. We did not think anything would be amiss. We did not think that the advertised
From an average TAS parent’s perspective, who, until recently, did not think twice about the school board’s activities… I had complete trust in a parent-run school board due to our same vested interest – our kids. Right now, I do not understand the thinking process that went into changing our school to an elite private school. TAS started out as a community school. The only reason I can think of is the oft-referenced drama of 2006 that resulted in the school almost losing its accreditation. I only know it has something to do with parents having too much influence and affecting the superintendent’s job. I also heard that that superintendent was not cut out for the job. That’s all I know. So, is it then, in order to avoid a repeat of said incident that the board has been slowing steering TAS in the direction of a private school where parents have no say in how the school is run? With all its benefits, privately-run schools are not without its disadvantages. Were the pros and cons adequately presented to the parents (the TAS foundation members) before the decision of changing the very structure of this school was made? Right now, almost all parents do not know that the school board has dissolved the TAS foundation, and with it, the voting rights and voices of all fee-paying parents. The board alone now controls ALL the assets of the TAS Foundation, and they can do anything they want with it. The board members would say that it was made public. This would be true. But it was made public in the most secretive of ways: hidden in the board meeting minutes that parents would have to log-in to the school website to find. Normal, busy parents usually would not be going through these minutes unless they have reason to do so. Nevertheless, this is what the board means when it says everything is transparent. So, in a way, all us parents must shoulder some blame. We were too complacent. We did not think anything would be amiss. We did not think that the advertised
HYPfDXyQpeoir
"Hennessy responded. Now she's gone. The new Head is meeting with groups of parents. And the students who were disciplined can come back to TAS next school year. So what's still the point of all this?" To me, I do not feel what has been raised by this petition has been addressed. Dr. Hennessy responded, with a lot of words, but without transparency or clarity. She's gone, but the issues still exist. The punishments that were summarily given were viewed too harsh by all but a few when taken in full context. Will anyone at school ever acknowledge that, in light of what happened, perhaps the current disciplinary process should be reviewed more closely and revisited, to prevent something similar repeating itself in the future. And with that in mind, for the students who were disciplined, has the school guaranteed they will be back at TAS next year? And if so, how will they be supported to make sure this year of uncertainty and learning disruption will not become a handicap in the rest of their high school experience and beyond. No, it wasn't one of my kids who was directly impacted by this video incident or its aftermath. But, I believe my kids' impression and experience as they are going through school have been affected. "All men make mistakes, but a good man yields when he knows his course is wrong, and repairs the evil. The only crime is pride." -- Sophocles, Antigone (The Theban Plays, #3)
Hennessy responded. Now she's gone. The new Head is meeting with groups of parents. And the students who were disciplined can come back to TAS next school year. So what's still the point of all this?
Adam Nelson, the new Interim Deputy Head of School, first joined TAS as Assistant to the Superintendent (Hennessy) for Special Projects. And while he has taken on various roles and titles over the years, the common knowledge is he was primarily acting on certain interests of Dr. Hennessy. A simpler question is why an American school would allow someone so visible to the outside use a misleading “Dr.” title and ask to be addressed as Dr. Nelson. Local Taiwan convention does not address lawyers with a ‘professor’ or ‘doctor’ title. So is it because Adam being in Taiwan feels the locals are gullible? Or he needs the title to feel a sense of superiority over others? —- Professional titles Trust me, I'm a doctor of law Should you call an American lawyer, a juris doctor, "Doctor"? Mar 1st 2013, The Economist BY S.A.P. | LOS ANGELES A LAWYER, a professor, and a physician walk into a bar. As they (predictably) begin to argue over drinks, the lawyer leans over the table and pulls out his trump card: “I'm right. Trust me, I’m a doctor.” The professor and physician are left speechless. The lawyer isn’t wrong, strictly speaking. The American law degree is the Juris Doctor, literally “doctor of law”. The change from LLB (bachelor of laws) and LLM (master of laws) reflected a different approach to legal education stateside. As the modern incarnation of an older European doctorate, the new JD was intended to provide only professional preparation as a follow-up to a primary degree, usually from a liberal arts program. JDs were confined to the United States until about 15 years ago. JD programs have been popping up in other countries since. The translation of the degree name is clear, but more sticky is whether a lawyer can properly refer to himself as a doctor. In America, “doctor” is commonly reserved for medical doctors and academics who hold a PhD (doctor of philosophy) degree. Holders of EdD (doctor of education) or PsyD (doctor of psychology)
What is the appeal process when I feel an unjust disciplinary decision has been made? Why doesn’t the school care to put a formal, systematic appeal process in place to understand student, parent or even faculty grievances?