What do you mean by "instance of underperformance"? Is that code for number of students?

Hi Mr. Chandra,

Thank you for this wonderful analysis, but we've been assured by our school leaders that we are the best school district in New Jersey regardless of what others say or what the analysis shows. Shouldn't we just trust them?

Millburn is a fine school district because of joint efforts by students, teachers, and parents but increasingly it looks like our “leaders” want to turn it into a sheep farm.

If one believes in the power of the sheep farm then the answer to your question is in the affirmative.

Perhaps the schools can provide the children with some extra workshops or afterschool tutoring instead of sending them home with homework that they might not quite grasp.

I'm not sure about your conclusion #3, but I would like to hear more. Why do you think that the data you've presented indicates a deficiency of resources, and are there specific resources that you have in mind there? Regards.

Another person trying to create an "us vs. them" situation vis a vis Millburn and Short Hills. Using small samples without a control is flawed and unacceptable.

I am a high schooler and Wyoming alum. In 3rd and 5th grade language arts I learned what was not brought back up until high school. I have only learned small bits about writing after fifth grade. K-5th we worked together to learn, not memorize or test. I didn't do any independent learning in elementary school as I did through middle school and high school. The focus in this district for 6-12 is not on learning and helping to create well rounded people but test scores and grades. Consequently, critical thinking and social skills are lacking in many students. In my experience, grades received have rarely represented competency. It's insane how much pressure and stress students are under to get good grades. Many teachers don't explain the subject but rather tell us what we need to know for the test. A school district with this high of a ranking should be educating its students. The testing takes all the time and there is not time to learn or comprehend. Also lacking is a sense of cohesiveness. Many people are self centered and will put themselves first in every situation. These values are supported in the upper level schools, esp in MHS. Many of my classmates think M/SH are two separate towns. We need to take the emphasis off testing and focus on learning. We need to refocus on the purpose of education, to create well rounded people who can truly think, not regurgitate details onto paper.

Hari,

I don't think your claims are entirely accurate, nor would they be meaningful if they were. NJASK scores bounce around randomly year to year and it is unwise to attribute too much meaning to them. The NJASK is designed to identify academic problems in students, not identify high-performance. The Science NJASK is particularly meaningless. Knowing how inadequate the NJASK is, the State is dropping it altogether in favor of the PARCC assessments.

When I looked up NJASK scores for Wyoming I saw Wyoming students sometimes outperforming, sometimes underperforming the district average. For instance, in G3 LA, Wyoming kids outperformed the district by 15 points in Adv Proficient or 2010-11.

Likewise for S Mtn and Hartshorn. There are random outperformances and underperformances.

http://education.state.nj.us/rc/rc11/nav.php?c=13;d=3190

One can legitimately have problems with the quality of education in Millburn and it would be interesting to hear what "fixes" you would like to see, but I don't think you should put so much weight on the NJASK.

Hari, You asked a simple question and you repeatedly got the run around by the boe and superintendent? That's really unacceptable. Why won't they commit to investigating this possible systemic problem across the schools? What could be more important? Roger- I disagree that "these" are random outperformances and underperformances. "These" are Millburn KIDS, maybe YOUR kids. They are not learning at a level that is even the average for all NJ students taking NJASK including Camden, Newark and other low-performing districts. That's okay with you? It's not okay for those KIDS and their future. Instead of asking Hari to suggest "fixes" , demand from the superintendent and the boe who are in charge of the schools how they are "fixing" what is not working. The red flags are up. Ask for accountability from those in charge.

For what it's worth, about 7 years ago, South Mountain 4th grade cumulative scores were #1 in the entire state.

And if you want to know whether SMS kids are "prepared" to move on the MMS and MHS, just look at the colleges that this year's high school seniors who are SMS alum are attending next year (with acceptances so far). Quite an impressive group.

Based on the time line you have laid shouldn't it explain the high quality of the output of SMS alums, and also their gaining admissions to excellent colleges this year. Formative years in elementary school matter a lot. If the current wide gaps at South Mountain persist, wonder if we can make the same claim in another seven years.

A few things to consider when looking at student results--how many years of preschool has a student had, what language is a student primary language; if a student is new to the school how well did they perform on standardized tests in prior years, does the school provide any "enrichment" sessions before the NJASK tests are given, how many student have "tutors" outside of school to help them keep up or get ahead. There are way too many variables here to jump to conclusions. I don't buy it and frankly, when my kid's NJ Ask scores come in the mail I leave them on the counter for a few days before I get around to opening them. I don't think they demonstrate or predict much (and I never share the results with my kids).

The last thing we need to do is encourage more "teaching to the test." Looking at standardized test scores over a three-year period of time is an inaccurate way to measure overall performance. We should always be looking to improve our schools, but this is a simplistic way to draw meaningful conclusions.

Susan1, msh and KLF - The meaningful conclusion I reach from these comments is that you represent Millburn's pervasive "stick your head in the sand and ignore the problem" crowd who are too busy with their own self-aggrandisement to notice or look under the covers and see that this school district has pervasive tutoring and emotionally destructive competition. Without it, where would it be? As for simplistic conclusions, a parent recently told me her daughter's high school teacher told the class, "YOU have to work harder, we dropped from 1 to 8"? The message from the top is clear in newspaper headlines fed to the press, accolades from administrators, single-minded utterances by the boe such as "Look at the number of Ivy League early acceptances we got in the senior class" in the same weeks as a negative court ruling involvin a preschool autism child was reported: http://www.northjersey.com/news/192535721_Special_education_court_ruling_a_topic_of_discussion_in_Millburn.html?page=allbreth
MIllburn can be assessed by many measures if anyone actually cared to do the work to find out. It's just not a pretty picture so no one bothers. OPEN YOUR EYES and look at the cold hard facts. Mr. Chandra is doing just that withNJASK scores, just the tip of the iceberg.

@ Katarina: NJASK scores are hardly a reliable metric. They are a snapshot from one given day. And there are other ways to assess the data. For example, the third graders in one year who "underperformed" are the same kids who underperformed in the subsequent year as 4th graders. Perhaps there were a larger number of Special Ed students in that grade, who would not/should not be expected to perform well on a standardized test. I'm not saying that there aren't issues in our schools that need to be addressed. I just don't think this score data gives us enough to identify and solve problems. And as far as the insane amount of competition and excessive tutoring: I agree it's awful. But that has nothing to do with what this op-Ed piece is about.

@Hari: our district SAT scores are way above the state average and have been for many more years than the three of NJASK data you analyzed here. What exactly is your complaint/concern?

Do Wyoming and South Mountain have higher % of special Ed? The NJ ASK reports performance for regular Ed too. Mr. Chandra asked point blank: more data from the district so we don't keep guessing. The SAT scores may very well mask underperformers. Mr. Chandra's comparison is within the Millburn district, not state average, which is not his question.

Susan1, you will find excuses about every measure. Hari has found a trend in one, NJASK scores, which the school leadership should have identified and reported to the public about its corrective action plans. Perhaps they are too busy to worry themselves about struggling Millburn elementary students. We do know they coudln't be bothered to address Hari's questions. Isn't that a pretty damned important point here? A concerned member of the public is virtually ignored? So what if this measure isn't perfect. Alarm bells should be raised when a cohort of students is performing less than average. And your unsurprising bigotry comes shining through in your comments about special education students. That is a boldly discriminatory statement. SAT scores? What a ruse. Tutoring is pervasive and starts very early with Millburn students. It is a nonsense to say this is somehow a more reliable measure of how our schools are performing. AP scores could be more reliable measures, but again Millburn messes with the meaning of those: the district gatekeeps and allows only the top performing students into those classes, and then includes in its reporting a substantial number of students' scores who take the exams but never took the AP courses at MHS. One one point I agree: your call for more honest metric's and reporting about how our schools' and all our students are performing.

I guess you missed my comment above: "I'm not saying that there aren't issues in our schools that need to be addressed. I just don't think this score data gives us enough to identify and solve problems." That hardly connotes a "don't worry, be happy" point of view. I am hardly a bigot and I resent being called one. I am a parent of several children who have gone through the schools here (with no outside tutoring), plus I am an educator by background. I am not blind to the problems that exist, but I resent being labeled a bigot when the start of this thread was a "boldly discriminatory" (your words) statement about lowered expectations for one segment of our local population. I'm done with this "discussion."

The current 5th grade at S Mtn has 27 students in each class. The PTO had to go down to the Bd of Ed to fight to have sufficient academic support for those students who need it in that grade and to get an aide in the classrooms. Why is it up to the parents to make sure that the building is staffed properly? What are our administrators doing? As KLF noted, S Mtn had the highest scores in the State a few years ago. So what has changed? The fourth grade teachers are the same, and they are among the most experienced and qualified teachers in that building. Class size matters. We are kidding ourselves if we think we can continue to cut teams at the middle school, enlarge elementary school class sizes, and hire less experienced teachers (at a lower pay scale) and not expect a drop in educational quality in this district. The administrative leadership in S. Mtn and Wyoming need to start advocating for their student populations. And the district administration needs to revisit class sizes at the elementary and middle school.

Hari,

I don't have a horse in this race (my children attend private school, so I guess that I've already voted with my feet). I don't know enough about the particulars to say much, other than thank you for having the determination and persistence to research this matter and make it public.

Hari, There is a vacant seat on the BOE. It would sure be great to have someone like you who is proactive and puts the kids first.

"So what if this measure isn't perfect. Alarm bells should be raised when a cohort of students is performing less than average."

But it isn't true that any Millburn elementary school is consistently performing below average. In some years South Mountain outperforms the district, in some years it underperforms. Even when a Millburn elementary school underperforms the district it is still far above the state's average. For many districts reaching the level of Millburn's lowest performing school would be a great accomplishment.

The schools in Millburn aren't perfect and there are individual students who are not doing well, so if you have any concrete ideas for improvement (new curricular materials, focused PD on some issue, more money for teachers to reduce class sizes) please suggest that, but I don't think it's fair to link the problem to any particular elementary school or blame the admin for year to year variations that they have no control over.

To Roger Williams, who said "For many districts reaching the level of Millburn's lowest performing school would be a great accomplishment."

Some fodder: Millburn's most recent AVERAGE scaled scores on the NJASK3 LAL for all 5 elementary schools was BELOW the lowest performing elementary school in Livingston (a first). For the past 2 years, on the NJASK3 LAL, Millburn's lowest performing elementary school was the lowest performing of ALL J district elementary schools (another first). Last year, Millburn's lowest performing school performed below the state average of all "J" districts, all "I" districts, all "GH" districts and all "FG" districts. In 2011, Millburn lowest performing school was even below the state average of all "DE" districts, performing better than only the state's most economically disadvantaged districts.

In less than 3 years, Dr. Crisfield has managed to single handedly close the achievement gap between New Jersey's poorest and wealthiest school districts. Give this man a medal.

Three questions for you Mr/Ms. Chandra:

1. What if the reason for the lower test scores at SMS and Wyoming is that they have a higher percentage of special needs kids? How would you propose remedying that? Millburn does have an excellent reputation for the way our district integrates special needs students into the mainstream and families do move to the district because of that. Do you feel that investigating the number of special needs students in those schools is a worthwhile exercise?

2. What if the test scores are the result of an influx of students living in the apartments along Millburn Avenue whose native language is not English? What if you learned those students generally catch up to and/or surpass their peers by the middle or high school years? What remedies would you propose at an elementary school level?

3. What proof do you have that a three-year sampling of a soon-to-be-discontinued test is statistically significant? Do teachers at Millburn Middle School report that students from Deerfield routinely outshine their peers from South Mountain and Wyoming? If your concerns and your sample size are valid, that would be the obvious outcome. You will have a hard time getting anyone to take you seriously if you can't cite a direct effect of the problem you claim to have spotted.

As to Tom Paine's #3 above: I HAVE noticed a difference in performance at MMS. In my children's 7th and 8th grade accelerated classes at MMS, there were a disproportionate number of SMS alumni.

^^^^Disproportionately high, that is. In case it wasn't clear.

The problems at SMS have cropped up over the past few years. S Mtn has always had students from the apartments whose parents may not be native English speakers. NJASK scores came out this summer. The administration knew the S Mtn 5th grade was an underperforming grade, yet it allowed the school year to begin with class sizes at the maximum recommended level and without adequate strategies intervention services available. If there is a larger % of classified kids (and there may/not be), then the district should have been more attuned to the academic needs of this grade, not less and should have been prepared to go to three sections or had classroom aides and SI services available from day 1.
There are pockets of surplus all over the current budget that the administration is proposing. Yet we are facing more and more cuts to academics while still going for the 2% tax increase.

JKH of the “Sky is not falling” hall of fame earlier in the thread

I appreciate your concern for me, but it is surprising you don’t care about elementary school children and the pipeline into the future that we are building in Millburn. Elementary schools may be “small bits” and “small piece of the puzzle” for you, but they will have big ramifications in the years to come if the issues of concern are not addressed effectively now.

I asked a few simple and logical questions and instead of understanding the issue both the school district administration and the BoE have repeatedly stonewalled me. They don’t want to talk about any data, nor do they want to disclose any data that can shed additional light on any issue of concern. My experience is not unique, but a frustratingly regular experience that many parents have gone through time and again.

I love Millburn and care enough about it to ask some valid questions based on publicly available data. Just a few questions, and it gets you all riled up to proclaim that the sky is not falling. Thank you for that valuable insight.

I have nothing to sell here, but you sure come across as someone who has a lot to lose unless you regularly sing praises about the district school administration, the BoE, and what not. Are you a snake oil salesman?

@SMS - Once the administration has provided that information, then we can determine if we have a problem. Right now all we have is a bunch of numbers that may or may not be significant.

Having lived in town for many years, I suspect that if there was a noticeable achievement gap in the middle school between the elementary schools (and the students in the stats offered would now be in middle school) there would be a great hue and cry and rending of garments from distraught parents and we would all be well aware of the issue.

Tom Paine:

You are particularly dense in not understanding the problem but have no hesitation in castigating others.

I am fine with three years of data to recognize issues, and by choice have limited my comments to that period because it can be deemed fresh, current and relevant to any meaningful discussion. Data going back to 2005 shows that while the underperformance differences were notable and sporadic, they have become wider and persistent in the last three years. Instead of disparaging me, go do your homework.

Don’t try to sidestep the issues that I raised. For people like you it does not matter however much evidence is provided for you have decided to be pig-headed in your conduct and as well as logic. You will always shoot the messenger or find something wrong with the measuring yard stick.

You can use all caps and be a village idiot if you want, but performance data for Grade 6 by incoming elementary schools is only available to the school district administration and the BoE. I asked for a public disclosure of the data but both of them were not forthcoming. You have to ask why? If there is nothing to hide, why not post the data on the BoE web site?

It is not my research that is shoddy, but it is your obscurantist mindset that prevents any reasonable discussion. The issues I raised have found a ready resonance here and elsewhere, so clueless wonders like you don’t mean much in my respect list.

I wouldn't expect any middle school teacher to admit to even significant discrepancies between students from different elementary schools -- that would cause an immediate reprimand.

Clearly, there's a lack of data detailed enough to figure out whether there's a real issue or not. Hari did a good job raising that question -- can we please focus on how to fix it?

Funny how people are so quick to cry about the incivility on all sides at Board meetings and yet a discussion here can't be had without equal incivility. Maybe the issue isn't the Board but the public at large? Maybe more civility would result in better responsiveness from the Board and Administration?

Hari doesn't like counterarguments and verbally demeans people with different opinions. That's why I ignored his opinion piece.

I'm sorry Hari, but it is indeed your research that is shoddy. You have identified a pattern but have not managed to show its effect.

Here's a link to the Wikipedia article on causality: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Causality It explains "Causality (also referred to as causation[1]) is the relationship between an event (the cause) and a second event (the effect), where the second event is understood as a consequence of the first.[2]

You have shown the event, but not the effect. That's just bad science.

If you can prove an effect then you will get an audience. Until then, you're just another whack-job on a message board.

Hedley: Civily speaking, the consensus is that there are problems with how students are being educated in our elementary schools, for one, and when members of the public point these out and ask about them, they are disparaged and ignored. Got it? Please don't try to demean the intelligence of the community with your obsfucating remarks. You write like you have a Harvard degree, so surely you get that. This board is filled with bullies the likes of which have paralyzed any civil debate - any debate period on any topic whatsoever. The fate of the school district's future is not looking very promising and that rests solely with the leadership: THE BOARD and their choice of administrator in chief.

There's also correlation. http://simple.wikipedia.org/wiki/Correlation

You would need to prove that there is a correlation between the lower grades on the NJ ASK test and poor performance at the middle or high school level and that there was not a third factor involved (e.g. there was a direct causal effect, see the post above)

As an example: you may prove that the New York Yankees do much worse than the Florida Marlins at a contest that involves balancing a bat on their fingers. But until you can prove a correlation between a team's success at bat-balancing and their performance during the game, all you've uncovered is a random-yet-meaningless statistic.

Sort of like the one about the ASK scores.

Hari, have no fear, you are onto something that hit a sore spot. That always brings out the protection squad of J S Beckerman, Tom Paine, Hedley, boe lackies.

Sophie:

You are spot on in your observations about board meetings.

It is funny to see the "Breck Shampoo model" lawyer up every time a question is raised about a decision or a disagreement voiced either by the public or by other board members.

There is no transparency, and any question about a decision or requests for data or pleas to look into a particular problem are met with a blank stares, obfuscation, disdain, hiding behind rules, and if nothing works then there is outright hostility.

No wonder the township is reduced to a state of apathy.

Bigotry? To what purpose would that serve? All schools within M/SH are under the auspices of one BOE/Admin. Regardless of Millburn or SH, the elementary schools follow one curriculm/grade with mirroring output expectations from all schools. All 5 elem school students matriculate into one Middle School then High School. To deliberately create an imbalance to the approx 25% of the population would be a disservice to the holistic quality of education that M/SH has and continues to maintain; as demanded by the constituents.

Mr. Chandra raises good issues about the issue of transparency. I do wish the board were more forthcoming with data when issues are raised. But why can't we have a civilized conversation, either here on Patch or at the BOE meetings, without it turning into name calling and snarkiness. "Village idiot," "Do your homework, Einstein,"I feel sorry for you"? How is this productive? And Sophie constant pandering? It makes me and many others not want to get anywhere near this discussion. So we are left to two bitter sides sniping at each other.

tmb/hedley:

It is nice to sit there and lecture about having a "civilized conversation", and selectively picking what you want to note how can it be productive. How about weighing in on the issue?

All I did is ask some questions, and wanted some information to look at some issues in the elementary school system. What do you get in return - nothing but zero from the school district administration and the BoE.

At least there is some discussion here, brickbats, disagreements and all - that is perfectly fine. We are here not to make friends but to discuss issues, and on occasion if a few have acted out their childishness then they got a dose of their own medicine. No need to get worked up on those minor sideshows.

At the end of the day, it is better to have a discussion to get clarity than none at all.

if you think a drop from 1 to 8 in the rankings was bad, the mismanagement, focus on bricks and mortar, and total lack of fiduciary oversight by 6 members of this board to suit the limitations of this administration is going to leave your kids with a subpar education and a lot more empty houses around town.

Is ii true that at last night's BOE meeting it was reported that S Mtn and Wyoming are now considered Title I schools? Now 2/5 of our elementary schools are Title I along with schools from Newark, Elizabeth, Camden, East Orange? If so, we have some real issues that need to be addressed here. How low are we willing to let our elementary schools go? What do you think that is going to do to home values in those neighborhoods? The BOE needs to start holding Crisfield accountable for educational programs - not just budgeting.

THE TRUTH IS BEGINNING TO TRICKLE OUT...

Despite his denial about performance differences across Millburn elementary schools and his "respectful disagreement" with my analysis, Dr. Crisfield on my questioning confirmed yesterday that additional funding and resources for strategy intervention (extra help for kids who need it and includes help inside and outside of class rooms on specific subjects) is being provided for both South Mountain and Wyoming schools.

Speaking of the "soft bigotry of lowered expectations", I came to know that both Wyoming and South Mountain schools were getting fewer strategy intervention hours than the other elementary schools to begin with. This was acknowledged by Dr. Christine Burton in her meeting with the PTOs, and additional funding/resources was signed off on February 27.

Dr. Crisfield noted that the funding for additional strategy intervention hours for both Wyoming and South Mountain (just to bring them on par with other schools in the district) is coming from federal Title 1 funds. What was not said was the criteria by which these funds are being sourced. Was it on economic or on performance criteria or a combination of both? I am not yet clear on that, but I believe the funding is not under School Improvement Grant (SIG) as applicable to Camden, Newark, and other schools. We will find out soon anyway...

Struggling students in middle school are getting tutoring after school paid for by Title 1 money. Why did Millburn qualify for that?

Why is it so difficult to get the information out of this district?

Just a thought...why not create a comprehensive district-wide report that includes all the measurable data included here (and more) AND broken down by each school showing: finances; # students per school, grade, teacher, class; # specialists; # students requiring help; schools entitled to Title 1 funds; # IEP students by school, grade; etc. And what about a "score card" by school so we truly know how each is doing? And what about electing to the BoE 1 rep/school (or at least to a sub-committee); giving each school equal representation? Perhaps I'm very naive or unrealistic to think that this would greatly reduce a lot of the uncertainty and mistrust. But we cannot expect the local media to be our 'watch dogs' because they haven't got enough staff, and do need to operate in a more effective and efficient manner. We need greater transparency and a "shared" vision for what we want/expect for the district as a district. Lastly, I think compiling a specific list of concerns and getting people organized outside of these "chats" and outside of BoE meetings would prove to be more prudent and allow the opportunity to receive and respond in a more conducive way to key issues and concerns. And, if they don't, well than the organized public can elect new officials willing to operate in a more transparent and functional manner. Ultimately, we need a better way of operating and it will take leadership in all areas to achieve that goal...for our children's sake.

Children feel it...
Parents know it...
NJ ASK scores say it...
NJ Department of Education Reward School ratings validate it...

Department of Education Posts List of Nearly 60 Reward Schools
Designation indicates overall high performance or marked progress on statewide exams

Which Millburn elementary schools got listed for NJ Department of Education Reward School ratings?

No prizes for guessing...See below

http://www.njspotlight.com/stories/13/03/11/department-of-education-posts-list-of-nearly-60-reward-schools/

http://www.njspotlight.com/assets/13/0310/2219

How long are we going to pretend that there is no "soft bigotry of lowered expectations" for one part of the town?

You can throw whatever excuses you want but they don't cut it.

Oakster, you missed the mark. Deerfield and Glenwood have longstanding principals, but Hartshorn lost theirs and their vice principal last year. The turnover in principals has been significant at SMS and Wyoming. Glenwood class sizes smaller than other schools after redistricting to Hartshorn and Deerfield. Hari has done a service to us all by pointing out stats that the district was hiding and not presenting to the public as other school districts routinely do.

Castaldo was "there" for his last two yoears under a new boss. Now we're getting closer to the heart of the matter.

sms said it best...there is no leadership in this district, anywhere. Talented leaders have run away or been pushed out (lest they show up the boss) and this will continue to be the trend. Change is far away and you are watching MIllburn sink.

I have to say I agree with Oakster, Mr. Paine and others who don't quite get the issue here.

It seems as if Mr Chandra has uncovered some discrepancies in test score results among the elementary schools.

He has asked the administration for proof that these discrepancies do not continue into the middle and high school years.

When the administration ignored his requests, he reached the conclusion that they had something to hide and that the NJ ASK scores were indeed indicative of a deeper problem. He further concluded that his daughter, a student at the Wyoming School, was being ill served by the district and subject to, as he calls it, "reduced expectations."

Had it occurred to you Mr. Chandra that compiling the statistics you asked for would be rather time-consuming and since the request came from one parent only and did not seem to be backed up by any anecdotal evidence, the administration did not give it high priority?

You do an excellent job of explaining the discrepancy in the test scores, but your argument becomes muddied when you try to explain what specific actions you would like taken as a result.

In reading through this piece, and the comments that follow, my question is why was this test score data not analyzed by the administration and presented to the board as it seems not to have been? My concern is that a parent and taxpayer who raised a legitimate concern and did the research and analysis surrounding test score data, is certainly entitled to more respectful answers from the administration and board than what he has received. What if his analysis has uncovered a problem that can be corrected and help students? Where I differ from your comment, Taylor Park, is that specific actions should be identified and rtaken by the administration and board, and Mr. Chandra has done the work they should have done. Your criticism is misplaced in this instance.

@Rupert Roland. Chandra's nasty tone on here - the name-calling alone. -- should give you a clear indication of why the administration-- and his neighbors-- have been treating him like just another crackpot.

I am old enough to remember a similar-but-opposite reaction about 5 years ago when South Mountain School had the highest scores in the state on some standardized test. Chandra's forerunners stormed the Board of Ed to demand to know why the district was perpetuating such a horrible injustice. The next year the scores leveled out again and all was forgotten.

Mr. Chanrda needs a hobby.

Or to put it another way, Mr. Roland - given Chandra demeanor on this board, do you really give any credence to his claim that the Board treated him rudely and dismissively? Seems far more likely the rudeness was the other way around.