APE and tech (APS)

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why is everyone ignoring the teachers union that also agrees with reducing tech?

Link to the AEA statement? I couldn't find it.

In the ArlNow article that was linked at the beginning, June Prakash stated on behalf of the AEA that she agrees with reducing tech in the classroom. I wonder if she was only speaking for herself though. From the teachers that I speak to and are actual friends with, they're tired of her and AEM guy. Thank you for your step/COLA advocacy, but we didn't agree to everything else you say on our behalf.

I don't know why folks are so focused on which organized groups support or have made statements. This topic has come up in conversations with other parents and teachers and they all seem to be generally aligned. I don't care what AEM, AEA or APE thinks. It's a common sense proposal that probably needs some refinement and more input from IT and schools, but is absolutely worth considering.

It's not though. This parent is not aligned at all with taking away tech, and doesn't care one iota about elementary iPad usage. Opt out if you're so inclined, but stop trying to policy my children away from things that work for them. And a lot of teachers use tech for really amazing things outside of what you read, even for K-2. Stop trying to speak for all of us. You're really only representing the people you know.

+1

Lexia was very helpful for my dyslexic kid, even pre-diagnosis. iPads can be useful tools, even for K-2.

The cost savings of cutting out a portion of iPads for K-2 are a joke. The more impactful budget solution would have been pushing back hard on Youngkin when he slashed APS funding. Fortunately, the GA was able to recoup some of his cuts, but not all.

And we’ve seen that for many kids, Lexia is replacing actual instruction. Tech use is up, performance is down. More and more research is coming out that these devices are not as effective as the old methods, are addicting, and trigger things in the brain we can’t even understand. The people who invent these devices don’t let their own kids use them. That’s telling.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why is everyone ignoring the teachers union that also agrees with reducing tech?

Link to the AEA statement? I couldn't find it.

In the ArlNow article that was linked at the beginning, June Prakash stated on behalf of the AEA that she agrees with reducing tech in the classroom. I wonder if she was only speaking for herself though. From the teachers that I speak to and are actual friends with, they're tired of her and AEM guy. Thank you for your step/COLA advocacy, but we didn't agree to everything else you say on our behalf.

I don't know why folks are so focused on which organized groups support or have made statements. This topic has come up in conversations with other parents and teachers and they all seem to be generally aligned. I don't care what AEM, AEA or APE thinks. It's a common sense proposal that probably needs some refinement and more input from IT and schools, but is absolutely worth considering.

It's not though. This parent is not aligned at all with taking away tech, and doesn't care one iota about elementary iPad usage. Opt out if you're so inclined, but stop trying to policy my children away from things that work for them. And a lot of teachers use tech for really amazing things outside of what you read, even for K-2. Stop trying to speak for all of us. You're really only representing the people you know.

+1

Lexia was very helpful for my dyslexic kid, even pre-diagnosis. iPads can be useful tools, even for K-2.

The cost savings of cutting out a portion of iPads for K-2 are a joke. The more impactful budget solution would have been pushing back hard on Youngkin when he slashed APS funding. Fortunately, the GA was able to recoup some of his cuts, but not all.

No one has proposed taking away Lexia, so you're safe. That's not even being discussed.

How would Lexia work without 1:1?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why is everyone ignoring the teachers union that also agrees with reducing tech?

Link to the AEA statement? I couldn't find it.

In the ArlNow article that was linked at the beginning, June Prakash stated on behalf of the AEA that she agrees with reducing tech in the classroom. I wonder if she was only speaking for herself though. From the teachers that I speak to and are actual friends with, they're tired of her and AEM guy. Thank you for your step/COLA advocacy, but we didn't agree to everything else you say on our behalf.

I don't know why folks are so focused on which organized groups support or have made statements. This topic has come up in conversations with other parents and teachers and they all seem to be generally aligned. I don't care what AEM, AEA or APE thinks. It's a common sense proposal that probably needs some refinement and more input from IT and schools, but is absolutely worth considering.

It's not though. This parent is not aligned at all with taking away tech, and doesn't care one iota about elementary iPad usage. Opt out if you're so inclined, but stop trying to policy my children away from things that work for them. And a lot of teachers use tech for really amazing things outside of what you read, even for K-2. Stop trying to speak for all of us. You're really only representing the people you know.

+1

Lexia was very helpful for my dyslexic kid, even pre-diagnosis. iPads can be useful tools, even for K-2.

The cost savings of cutting out a portion of iPads for K-2 are a joke. The more impactful budget solution would have been pushing back hard on Youngkin when he slashed APS funding. Fortunately, the GA was able to recoup some of his cuts, but not all.

No one has proposed taking away Lexia, so you're safe. That's not even being discussed.

Not yet, but that's how APE works. In increments.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why is everyone ignoring the teachers union that also agrees with reducing tech?

Link to the AEA statement? I couldn't find it.

In the ArlNow article that was linked at the beginning, June Prakash stated on behalf of the AEA that she agrees with reducing tech in the classroom. I wonder if she was only speaking for herself though. From the teachers that I speak to and are actual friends with, they're tired of her and AEM guy. Thank you for your step/COLA advocacy, but we didn't agree to everything else you say on our behalf.

I don't know why folks are so focused on which organized groups support or have made statements. This topic has come up in conversations with other parents and teachers and they all seem to be generally aligned. I don't care what AEM, AEA or APE thinks. It's a common sense proposal that probably needs some refinement and more input from IT and schools, but is absolutely worth considering.

It's not though. This parent is not aligned at all with taking away tech, and doesn't care one iota about elementary iPad usage. Opt out if you're so inclined, but stop trying to policy my children away from things that work for them. And a lot of teachers use tech for really amazing things outside of what you read, even for K-2. Stop trying to speak for all of us. You're really only representing the people you know.

+1

Lexia was very helpful for my dyslexic kid, even pre-diagnosis. iPads can be useful tools, even for K-2.

The cost savings of cutting out a portion of iPads for K-2 are a joke. The more impactful budget solution would have been pushing back hard on Youngkin when he slashed APS funding. Fortunately, the GA was able to recoup some of his cuts, but not all.

No one has proposed taking away Lexia, so you're safe. That's not even being discussed.

How would Lexia work without 1:1?

As posted above:

There would still be devices available for K-2 and teachers could decide if they wanted a partial classroom set for stations (e.g., 8-10 for their classroom) or to share a full classroom set between classes (e.g., morning vs afternoon).

I suppose teachers could also trade by day and one teacher could do Lexia M/W and another teacher could do handwriting and then they could swap for Tu/Th.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why is everyone ignoring the teachers union that also agrees with reducing tech?

Link to the AEA statement? I couldn't find it.

In the ArlNow article that was linked at the beginning, June Prakash stated on behalf of the AEA that she agrees with reducing tech in the classroom. I wonder if she was only speaking for herself though. From the teachers that I speak to and are actual friends with, they're tired of her and AEM guy. Thank you for your step/COLA advocacy, but we didn't agree to everything else you say on our behalf.

I don't know why folks are so focused on which organized groups support or have made statements. This topic has come up in conversations with other parents and teachers and they all seem to be generally aligned. I don't care what AEM, AEA or APE thinks. It's a common sense proposal that probably needs some refinement and more input from IT and schools, but is absolutely worth considering.

It's not though. This parent is not aligned at all with taking away tech, and doesn't care one iota about elementary iPad usage. Opt out if you're so inclined, but stop trying to policy my children away from things that work for them. And a lot of teachers use tech for really amazing things outside of what you read, even for K-2. Stop trying to speak for all of us. You're really only representing the people you know.

+1

Lexia was very helpful for my dyslexic kid, even pre-diagnosis. iPads can be useful tools, even for K-2.

The cost savings of cutting out a portion of iPads for K-2 are a joke. The more impactful budget solution would have been pushing back hard on Youngkin when he slashed APS funding. Fortunately, the GA was able to recoup some of his cuts, but not all.

And we’ve seen that for many kids, Lexia is replacing actual instruction. Tech use is up, performance is down. More and more research is coming out that these devices are not as effective as the old methods, are addicting, and trigger things in the brain we can’t even understand. The people who invent these devices don’t let their own kids use them. That’s telling.

Lexia does provide systemic instruction on structured reading. It's a great supplement to in-class instruction. With increasing class size because the county and state are not properly funding APS, tools like Lexia will help make sure that kids are getting proper, thorough instruction and reinforcement. Kids should absolutely be using iPads a little as possible, but there is a place for them 1:1 in the K-2 classrooms.

I'd take several extra reading specialists in every school, but that will cost a lot more than a fraction of iPads.

We get what we pay for.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why is everyone ignoring the teachers union that also agrees with reducing tech?

Link to the AEA statement? I couldn't find it.

In the ArlNow article that was linked at the beginning, June Prakash stated on behalf of the AEA that she agrees with reducing tech in the classroom. I wonder if she was only speaking for herself though. From the teachers that I speak to and are actual friends with, they're tired of her and AEM guy. Thank you for your step/COLA advocacy, but we didn't agree to everything else you say on our behalf.

I don't know why folks are so focused on which organized groups support or have made statements. This topic has come up in conversations with other parents and teachers and they all seem to be generally aligned. I don't care what AEM, AEA or APE thinks. It's a common sense proposal that probably needs some refinement and more input from IT and schools, but is absolutely worth considering.

It's not though. This parent is not aligned at all with taking away tech, and doesn't care one iota about elementary iPad usage. Opt out if you're so inclined, but stop trying to policy my children away from things that work for them. And a lot of teachers use tech for really amazing things outside of what you read, even for K-2. Stop trying to speak for all of us. You're really only representing the people you know.

+1

Lexia was very helpful for my dyslexic kid, even pre-diagnosis. iPads can be useful tools, even for K-2.

The cost savings of cutting out a portion of iPads for K-2 are a joke. The more impactful budget solution would have been pushing back hard on Youngkin when he slashed APS funding. Fortunately, the GA was able to recoup some of his cuts, but not all.

No one has proposed taking away Lexia, so you're safe. That's not even being discussed.

Not yet, but that's how APE works. In increments.

Could you give some examples?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why is everyone ignoring the teachers union that also agrees with reducing tech?

Link to the AEA statement? I couldn't find it.

In the ArlNow article that was linked at the beginning, June Prakash stated on behalf of the AEA that she agrees with reducing tech in the classroom. I wonder if she was only speaking for herself though. From the teachers that I speak to and are actual friends with, they're tired of her and AEM guy. Thank you for your step/COLA advocacy, but we didn't agree to everything else you say on our behalf.

I don't know why folks are so focused on which organized groups support or have made statements. This topic has come up in conversations with other parents and teachers and they all seem to be generally aligned. I don't care what AEM, AEA or APE thinks. It's a common sense proposal that probably needs some refinement and more input from IT and schools, but is absolutely worth considering.

It's not though. This parent is not aligned at all with taking away tech, and doesn't care one iota about elementary iPad usage. Opt out if you're so inclined, but stop trying to policy my children away from things that work for them. And a lot of teachers use tech for really amazing things outside of what you read, even for K-2. Stop trying to speak for all of us. You're really only representing the people you know.

+1

Lexia was very helpful for my dyslexic kid, even pre-diagnosis. iPads can be useful tools, even for K-2.

The cost savings of cutting out a portion of iPads for K-2 are a joke. The more impactful budget solution would have been pushing back hard on Youngkin when he slashed APS funding. Fortunately, the GA was able to recoup some of his cuts, but not all.

And we’ve seen that for many kids, Lexia is replacing actual instruction. Tech use is up, performance is down. More and more research is coming out that these devices are not as effective as the old methods, are addicting, and trigger things in the brain we can’t even understand. The people who invent these devices don’t let their own kids use them. That’s telling.

Lexia does provide systemic instruction on structured reading. It's a great supplement to in-class instruction. With increasing class size because the county and state are not properly funding APS, tools like Lexia will help make sure that kids are getting proper, thorough instruction and reinforcement. Kids should absolutely be using iPads a little as possible, but there is a place for them 1:1 in the K-2 classrooms.

I'd take several extra reading specialists in every school, but that will cost a lot more than a fraction of iPads.

We get what we pay for.

Why do you think 1:1 is needed? You've given no justification why kids can't share if they're only using them for a limited amount of time each day.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why is everyone ignoring the teachers union that also agrees with reducing tech?

Link to the AEA statement? I couldn't find it.

In the ArlNow article that was linked at the beginning, June Prakash stated on behalf of the AEA that she agrees with reducing tech in the classroom. I wonder if she was only speaking for herself though. From the teachers that I speak to and are actual friends with, they're tired of her and AEM guy. Thank you for your step/COLA advocacy, but we didn't agree to everything else you say on our behalf.

I don't know why folks are so focused on which organized groups support or have made statements. This topic has come up in conversations with other parents and teachers and they all seem to be generally aligned. I don't care what AEM, AEA or APE thinks. It's a common sense proposal that probably needs some refinement and more input from IT and schools, but is absolutely worth considering.

It's not though. This parent is not aligned at all with taking away tech, and doesn't care one iota about elementary iPad usage. Opt out if you're so inclined, but stop trying to policy my children away from things that work for them. And a lot of teachers use tech for really amazing things outside of what you read, even for K-2. Stop trying to speak for all of us. You're really only representing the people you know.

+1

Lexia was very helpful for my dyslexic kid, even pre-diagnosis. iPads can be useful tools, even for K-2.

The cost savings of cutting out a portion of iPads for K-2 are a joke. The more impactful budget solution would have been pushing back hard on Youngkin when he slashed APS funding. Fortunately, the GA was able to recoup some of his cuts, but not all.

No one has proposed taking away Lexia, so you're safe. That's not even being discussed.

Not yet, but that's how APE works. In increments.

Could you give some examples?

Sure, here's one - back during the pandemic when they claimed they just wanted the "choice" to be in person, then later after they got that, they pushed to cut funding for virtual learning. Thus taking away the "choice" for kids who still wanted/needed virtual.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why is everyone ignoring the teachers union that also agrees with reducing tech?

Link to the AEA statement? I couldn't find it.

In the ArlNow article that was linked at the beginning, June Prakash stated on behalf of the AEA that she agrees with reducing tech in the classroom. I wonder if she was only speaking for herself though. From the teachers that I speak to and are actual friends with, they're tired of her and AEM guy. Thank you for your step/COLA advocacy, but we didn't agree to everything else you say on our behalf.

I don't know why folks are so focused on which organized groups support or have made statements. This topic has come up in conversations with other parents and teachers and they all seem to be generally aligned. I don't care what AEM, AEA or APE thinks. It's a common sense proposal that probably needs some refinement and more input from IT and schools, but is absolutely worth considering.

It's not though. This parent is not aligned at all with taking away tech, and doesn't care one iota about elementary iPad usage. Opt out if you're so inclined, but stop trying to policy my children away from things that work for them. And a lot of teachers use tech for really amazing things outside of what you read, even for K-2. Stop trying to speak for all of us. You're really only representing the people you know.

+1

Lexia was very helpful for my dyslexic kid, even pre-diagnosis. iPads can be useful tools, even for K-2.

The cost savings of cutting out a portion of iPads for K-2 are a joke. The more impactful budget solution would have been pushing back hard on Youngkin when he slashed APS funding. Fortunately, the GA was able to recoup some of his cuts, but not all.

No one has proposed taking away Lexia, so you're safe. That's not even being discussed.

Not yet, but that's how APE works. In increments.

Could you give some examples?

Sure, here's one - back during the pandemic when they claimed they just wanted the "choice" to be in person, then later after they got that, they pushed to cut funding for virtual learning. Thus taking away the "choice" for kids who still wanted/needed virtual.

You mean the failure of a program created by APS that sucked up all the funding that was supposed to help with remediation? That program was a hot mess and embarrassment for APS. I'm not an APE supporter but I'm not sure that's the example you want to use.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why is everyone ignoring the teachers union that also agrees with reducing tech?

Link to the AEA statement? I couldn't find it.

In the ArlNow article that was linked at the beginning, June Prakash stated on behalf of the AEA that she agrees with reducing tech in the classroom. I wonder if she was only speaking for herself though. From the teachers that I speak to and are actual friends with, they're tired of her and AEM guy. Thank you for your step/COLA advocacy, but we didn't agree to everything else you say on our behalf.

I don't know why folks are so focused on which organized groups support or have made statements. This topic has come up in conversations with other parents and teachers and they all seem to be generally aligned. I don't care what AEM, AEA or APE thinks. It's a common sense proposal that probably needs some refinement and more input from IT and schools, but is absolutely worth considering.

It's not though. This parent is not aligned at all with taking away tech, and doesn't care one iota about elementary iPad usage. Opt out if you're so inclined, but stop trying to policy my children away from things that work for them. And a lot of teachers use tech for really amazing things outside of what you read, even for K-2. Stop trying to speak for all of us. You're really only representing the people you know.

+1

Lexia was very helpful for my dyslexic kid, even pre-diagnosis. iPads can be useful tools, even for K-2.

The cost savings of cutting out a portion of iPads for K-2 are a joke. The more impactful budget solution would have been pushing back hard on Youngkin when he slashed APS funding. Fortunately, the GA was able to recoup some of his cuts, but not all.

No one has proposed taking away Lexia, so you're safe. That's not even being discussed.

Not yet, but that's how APE works. In increments.

Could you give some examples?

Sure, here's one - back during the pandemic when they claimed they just wanted the "choice" to be in person, then later after they got that, they pushed to cut funding for virtual learning. Thus taking away the "choice" for kids who still wanted/needed virtual.

You realize the APS virtual program was a dumpster fire waste of money per an APS auditor report, right? https://www.arlnow.com/2022/09/09/aps-to-apply-lessons-from-virtual-learning-program-audit-to-planning-for-new-online-program/

Do you have a better example?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why is everyone ignoring the teachers union that also agrees with reducing tech?

Link to the AEA statement? I couldn't find it.

In the ArlNow article that was linked at the beginning, June Prakash stated on behalf of the AEA that she agrees with reducing tech in the classroom. I wonder if she was only speaking for herself though. From the teachers that I speak to and are actual friends with, they're tired of her and AEM guy. Thank you for your step/COLA advocacy, but we didn't agree to everything else you say on our behalf.

I don't know why folks are so focused on which organized groups support or have made statements. This topic has come up in conversations with other parents and teachers and they all seem to be generally aligned. I don't care what AEM, AEA or APE thinks. It's a common sense proposal that probably needs some refinement and more input from IT and schools, but is absolutely worth considering.

It's not though. This parent is not aligned at all with taking away tech, and doesn't care one iota about elementary iPad usage. Opt out if you're so inclined, but stop trying to policy my children away from things that work for them. And a lot of teachers use tech for really amazing things outside of what you read, even for K-2. Stop trying to speak for all of us. You're really only representing the people you know.

+1

Lexia was very helpful for my dyslexic kid, even pre-diagnosis. iPads can be useful tools, even for K-2.

The cost savings of cutting out a portion of iPads for K-2 are a joke. The more impactful budget solution would have been pushing back hard on Youngkin when he slashed APS funding. Fortunately, the GA was able to recoup some of his cuts, but not all.

And we’ve seen that for many kids, Lexia is replacing actual instruction. Tech use is up, performance is down. More and more research is coming out that these devices are not as effective as the old methods, are addicting, and trigger things in the brain we can’t even understand. The people who invent these devices don’t let their own kids use them. That’s telling.

Lexia does provide systemic instruction on structured reading. It's a great supplement to in-class instruction. With increasing class size because the county and state are not properly funding APS, tools like Lexia will help make sure that kids are getting proper, thorough instruction and reinforcement. Kids should absolutely be using iPads a little as possible, but there is a place for them 1:1 in the K-2 classrooms.

I'd take several extra reading specialists in every school, but that will cost a lot more than a fraction of iPads.

We get what we pay for.

Why do you think 1:1 is needed? You've given no justification why kids can't share if they're only using them for a limited amount of time each day.

It would be too time consuming for teachers to constantly be disinfecting iPads and logging kids in and out. Plus, it’d potentially restrict flexible groupings. What if a kid switches to a new small group? What is a kid got pulled out for extra help?

Also, if there is any sort of situation where kids needed to be virtual there wouldn’t be enough.

Unnecessary administrative nightmare for saving a small amount. This whole exercise is a distraction from the bigger budget issues.

Why hasn’t APE addressed the underfunding by the state and county? Why didn’t they pushback on Youngkin’s cut?

It’s not about the iPads.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why is everyone ignoring the teachers union that also agrees with reducing tech?

Link to the AEA statement? I couldn't find it.

In the ArlNow article that was linked at the beginning, June Prakash stated on behalf of the AEA that she agrees with reducing tech in the classroom. I wonder if she was only speaking for herself though. From the teachers that I speak to and are actual friends with, they're tired of her and AEM guy. Thank you for your step/COLA advocacy, but we didn't agree to everything else you say on our behalf.

I don't know why folks are so focused on which organized groups support or have made statements. This topic has come up in conversations with other parents and teachers and they all seem to be generally aligned. I don't care what AEM, AEA or APE thinks. It's a common sense proposal that probably needs some refinement and more input from IT and schools, but is absolutely worth considering.

It's not though. This parent is not aligned at all with taking away tech, and doesn't care one iota about elementary iPad usage. Opt out if you're so inclined, but stop trying to policy my children away from things that work for them. And a lot of teachers use tech for really amazing things outside of what you read, even for K-2. Stop trying to speak for all of us. You're really only representing the people you know.

+1

Lexia was very helpful for my dyslexic kid, even pre-diagnosis. iPads can be useful tools, even for K-2.

The cost savings of cutting out a portion of iPads for K-2 are a joke. The more impactful budget solution would have been pushing back hard on Youngkin when he slashed APS funding. Fortunately, the GA was able to recoup some of his cuts, but not all.

No one has proposed taking away Lexia, so you're safe. That's not even being discussed.

Not yet, but that's how APE works. In increments.

Could you give some examples?

Sure, here's one - back during the pandemic when they claimed they just wanted the "choice" to be in person, then later after they got that, they pushed to cut funding for virtual learning. Thus taking away the "choice" for kids who still wanted/needed virtual.

You realize the APS virtual program was a dumpster fire waste of money per an APS auditor report, right? https://www.arlnow.com/2022/09/09/aps-to-apply-lessons-from-virtual-learning-program-audit-to-planning-for-new-online-program/

Do you have a better example?

Spawn of anti-vaxxers exposes class to measles. Whole class (or beyond) has to isolate for 2 weeks.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why is everyone ignoring the teachers union that also agrees with reducing tech?

Link to the AEA statement? I couldn't find it.

In the ArlNow article that was linked at the beginning, June Prakash stated on behalf of the AEA that she agrees with reducing tech in the classroom. I wonder if she was only speaking for herself though. From the teachers that I speak to and are actual friends with, they're tired of her and AEM guy. Thank you for your step/COLA advocacy, but we didn't agree to everything else you say on our behalf.

I don't know why folks are so focused on which organized groups support or have made statements. This topic has come up in conversations with other parents and teachers and they all seem to be generally aligned. I don't care what AEM, AEA or APE thinks. It's a common sense proposal that probably needs some refinement and more input from IT and schools, but is absolutely worth considering.

It's not though. This parent is not aligned at all with taking away tech, and doesn't care one iota about elementary iPad usage. Opt out if you're so inclined, but stop trying to policy my children away from things that work for them. And a lot of teachers use tech for really amazing things outside of what you read, even for K-2. Stop trying to speak for all of us. You're really only representing the people you know.

+1

Lexia was very helpful for my dyslexic kid, even pre-diagnosis. iPads can be useful tools, even for K-2.

The cost savings of cutting out a portion of iPads for K-2 are a joke. The more impactful budget solution would have been pushing back hard on Youngkin when he slashed APS funding. Fortunately, the GA was able to recoup some of his cuts, but not all.

No one has proposed taking away Lexia, so you're safe. That's not even being discussed.

Not yet, but that's how APE works. In increments.

Could you give some examples?

Sure, here's one - back during the pandemic when they claimed they just wanted the "choice" to be in person, then later after they got that, they pushed to cut funding for virtual learning. Thus taking away the "choice" for kids who still wanted/needed virtual.

You realize the APS virtual program was a dumpster fire waste of money per an APS auditor report, right? https://www.arlnow.com/2022/09/09/aps-to-apply-lessons-from-virtual-learning-program-audit-to-planning-for-new-online-program/

Do you have a better example?

Spawn of anti-vaxxers exposes class to measles. Whole class (or beyond) has to isolate for 2 weeks.

What are you talking about and what does it have to do with APE’s alleged slippery slope behavior?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Of all the things I care about, elementary school iPad usage is the least of my concerns. If APE talked to their teachers and principals, they would find that even in upper elem, they aren’t even used that much. It’s mostly used for differentiation, so that teachers can put the class on Lexia or Dreambox so that they can do small group work. Anything more will cost money for more teachers to supervise, and we all know what’s going on with the budget. And yes, many standardized tests are administered electronically. You will have to go to Richmond for that.

So tired of APE taking all the oxygen out of the room, so we can’t talk about more salient issues affecting APS. ArlNow is now their mouthpiece.

The head of AEA agrees with them! Everything on your list can be done with a class set and not 1-1. And no SOLs until grade 3.

Believe me. The head of AEA doesn't speak for all teachers, just as APE doesn't speak for all parents.

Signed, APS teacher and parent

Is June Prekash even a teacher?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why is everyone ignoring the teachers union that also agrees with reducing tech?

Link to the AEA statement? I couldn't find it.

In the ArlNow article that was linked at the beginning, June Prakash stated on behalf of the AEA that she agrees with reducing tech in the classroom. I wonder if she was only speaking for herself though. From the teachers that I speak to and are actual friends with, they're tired of her and AEM guy. Thank you for your step/COLA advocacy, but we didn't agree to everything else you say on our behalf.

I don't know why folks are so focused on which organized groups support or have made statements. This topic has come up in conversations with other parents and teachers and they all seem to be generally aligned. I don't care what AEM, AEA or APE thinks. It's a common sense proposal that probably needs some refinement and more input from IT and schools, but is absolutely worth considering.

It's not though. This parent is not aligned at all with taking away tech, and doesn't care one iota about elementary iPad usage. Opt out if you're so inclined, but stop trying to policy my children away from things that work for them. And a lot of teachers use tech for really amazing things outside of what you read, even for K-2. Stop trying to speak for all of us. You're really only representing the people you know.

+1

Lexia was very helpful for my dyslexic kid, even pre-diagnosis. iPads can be useful tools, even for K-2.

The cost savings of cutting out a portion of iPads for K-2 are a joke. The more impactful budget solution would have been pushing back hard on Youngkin when he slashed APS funding. Fortunately, the GA was able to recoup some of his cuts, but not all.

And we’ve seen that for many kids, Lexia is replacing actual instruction. Tech use is up, performance is down. More and more research is coming out that these devices are not as effective as the old methods, are addicting, and trigger things in the brain we can’t even understand. The people who invent these devices don’t let their own kids use them. That’s telling.

Lexia does provide systemic instruction on structured reading. It's a great supplement to in-class instruction. With increasing class size because the county and state are not properly funding APS, tools like Lexia will help make sure that kids are getting proper, thorough instruction and reinforcement. Kids should absolutely be using iPads a little as possible, but there is a place for them 1:1 in the K-2 classrooms.

I'd take several extra reading specialists in every school, but that will cost a lot more than a fraction of iPads.

We get what we pay for.

Why do you think 1:1 is needed? You've given no justification why kids can't share if they're only using them for a limited amount of time each day.

It would be too time consuming for teachers to constantly be disinfecting iPads and logging kids in and out. Plus, it’d potentially restrict flexible groupings. What if a kid switches to a new small group? What is a kid got pulled out for extra help?

Also, if there is any sort of situation where kids needed to be virtual there wouldn’t be enough.

Unnecessary administrative nightmare for saving a small amount. This whole exercise is a distraction from the bigger budget issues.

Why hasn’t APE addressed the underfunding by the state and county? Why didn’t they pushback on Youngkin’s cut?

It’s not about the iPads.

Teachers aren't disinfecting anything these days.

Kids are used to signing into devices and already do so routinely. Ask your kid their student number and they'll say it at lightening speed from frequent use.

Teachers already share equipment all the time and I have no doubt they could do so with iPads, just like they did before Covid. Several K-2 teachers on this thread have even agreed it's a non issue.

No parent of a K-2 student will ever agree to virtual instruction again unless society collapses and school couldn't resume for many months. It's a nightmare (as a parent who lives this during the pandemic with a 6 yo) and "virtually" no learning happens.

Blaming APE for Youngkin is a pretty huge stretch. APE is really just a few vocal APS parents.