Virtual Academy students lagging behind in person

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They are regurgitating what "Dr." Reesman posted attacking the school. Her data on enrollment isn't accurate and the data she is using is expected projected growth but its common kids go up and down or stay stagnant and that's not always a true measure.

Reesman and Smelkinson will do anything to stay relevant, so they desperately cling to schools being closed 3 years ago. It's sad and just as pathetic as it was then.

They did not close. They went virtual.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They are regurgitating what "Dr." Reesman posted attacking the school. Her data on enrollment isn't accurate and the data she is using is expected projected growth but its common kids go up and down or stay stagnant and that's not always a true measure.

Why the scare quotes?

Does she not have a doctorate in the field you are discussing?

DP but no? She doesn't..her PhD is in neuropsych. That doesnt make her an expert in the field being discussed. She clearly loves to pretend it does though. Anyone who unironically calls themself "Wonder Woman" is questionable to begin with.

If she were a Wonder Woman she could have made virtual work for her kids.

😂🤣. You have a point here! It’s so bizarre someone uses their free time for this “analysis” to go after a small program that is clearly beneficial to some families.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They are regurgitating what "Dr." Reesman posted attacking the school. Her data on enrollment isn't accurate and the data she is using is expected projected growth but its common kids go up and down or stay stagnant and that's not always a true measure.

Why the scare quotes?

Does she not have a doctorate in the field you are discussing?

DP but no? She doesn't..her PhD is in neuropsych. That doesnt make her an expert in the field being discussed. She clearly loves to pretend it does though. Anyone who unironically calls themself "Wonder Woman" is questionable to begin with.

If she were a Wonder Woman she could have made virtual work for her kids.

😂🤣. You have a point here! It’s so bizarre someone uses their free time for this “analysis” to go after a small program that is clearly beneficial to some families.

More bizzarre when it's nothing like covid virtual school and she has zero experience with it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Here it is again...parents in this county are so behind the times. Most districts across the country have offered virtual options since the early aughts. The fact MCPS only did in 2020 because of the pandemic is embarrassing. It's time to join the rest of the country in the 21st century without complaining because remote instruction didn't work for your kid during the pandemic. It's so absurd.

Just curious- how many of the virtual programs "across the country" are actually offered at the district level? Particularly in pre-pandemic times. Quite often the virtual programs are administered at the state level, which makes sense to me. So this is partly on the state of MD.

DP-I would first say, do your own research before asking others to do it for you. But all of my teaching friends from my program are in various states and it is offered at the district level. So, no. It's not on the state of Maryland at all. It could be implemented district wide as its done in MANY other places. MoCo has a unique set of parents that simply refuse to hear any other alternatives other than "in-person". It is sad because instead of using the money and time to refine a district wide program, people just want to shut it down because of the pandemic. All of the parents who continue to post this article on social media are the same exact parents who were at every single board meeting complaining about virtual. Doesn't take a genius to figure out their agenda. It is quite sad and pathetic.

Lady, well before the pandemic there was research showing that virtual doesn’t even work for college students. Anyone with a single brain cell knows it’s a disaster for children, and yes, we know this because of the pandemic There is an extremely narrow case for it as a stop-gap for sick kids and SN kids who truly cannot be accomodated at their current placement, but it is not a long-term solution.

My kids did great in virtual. I think the problem is mostly with parents who left young children unsupervised and expected better results. The problem isn't virtual but lazy parents.

Literally every time we have a conversation on this board about virtual academy. People have to brag about how they are hard-working parent and not a lazy parent and that's why their kid is doing well in virtual school. It's funny how they always make it about themselves and never about what's best for their children. I notice the same thing about homeschooling parents. It's such an ego thing where you have to brag about how you're a superior parent.

Education is best for the children. It's shocking that you need this spelled out.

Then why do all the virtual academy parents claim The only reason their kid is successful is because parents are willing to work hard and there are lazy parents like to me. You're really negating your own argument

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Here it is again...parents in this county are so behind the times. Most districts across the country have offered virtual options since the early aughts. The fact MCPS only did in 2020 because of the pandemic is embarrassing. It's time to join the rest of the country in the 21st century without complaining because remote instruction didn't work for your kid during the pandemic. It's so absurd.

Just curious- how many of the virtual programs "across the country" are actually offered at the district level? Particularly in pre-pandemic times. Quite often the virtual programs are administered at the state level, which makes sense to me. So this is partly on the state of MD.

DP-I would first say, do your own research before asking others to do it for you. But all of my teaching friends from my program are in various states and it is offered at the district level. So, no. It's not on the state of Maryland at all. It could be implemented district wide as its done in MANY other places. MoCo has a unique set of parents that simply refuse to hear any other alternatives other than "in-person". It is sad because instead of using the money and time to refine a district wide program, people just want to shut it down because of the pandemic. All of the parents who continue to post this article on social media are the same exact parents who were at every single board meeting complaining about virtual. Doesn't take a genius to figure out their agenda. It is quite sad and pathetic.

Lady, well before the pandemic there was research showing that virtual doesn’t even work for college students. Anyone with a single brain cell knows it’s a disaster for children, and yes, we know this because of the pandemic There is an extremely narrow case for it as a stop-gap for sick kids and SN kids who truly cannot be accomodated at their current placement, but it is not a long-term solution.

My kids did great in virtual. I think the problem is mostly with parents who left young children unsupervised and expected better results. The problem isn't virtual but lazy parents.

How dare those parents work to feed their families! Who needs housing anyway?

And yet we all seem to manage caring for our kids unlike you.

Congratulations on being a single income family or having complete schedule autonomy in your job so you can work around your kids educational schedule. You do realize you were in the complete statistical minority in United States

Or, maybe you should consider your family schedule to be home with your kids or hire a nanny to raise your kids since you are struggling so much.

If I work in a hire, a nanny would absolutely not be so that my kid could do virtual academy. I don't understand why that's a benefit to my kid at all

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They are regurgitating what "Dr." Reesman posted attacking the school. Her data on enrollment isn't accurate and the data she is using is expected projected growth but its common kids go up and down or stay stagnant and that's not always a true measure.

Why the scare quotes?

Does she not have a doctorate in the field you are discussing?

DP but no? She doesn't..her PhD is in neuropsych. That doesnt make her an expert in the field being discussed. She clearly loves to pretend it does though. Anyone who unironically calls themself "Wonder Woman" is questionable to begin with.

So, we’re also going to dismiss other neuropsych PhDs who comment on education, right?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They are regurgitating what "Dr." Reesman posted attacking the school. Her data on enrollment isn't accurate and the data she is using is expected projected growth but its common kids go up and down or stay stagnant and that's not always a true measure.

Why the scare quotes?

Does she not have a doctorate in the field you are discussing?

DP but no? She doesn't..her PhD is in neuropsych. That doesnt make her an expert in the field being discussed. She clearly loves to pretend it does though. Anyone who unironically calls themself "Wonder Woman" is questionable to begin with.

If she were a Wonder Woman she could have made virtual work for her kids.

😂🤣. You have a point here! It’s so bizarre someone uses their free time for this “analysis” to go after a small program that is clearly beneficial to some families.

More bizzarre when it's nothing like covid virtual school and she has zero experience with it.

Although I haven't used VA, I thought the same thing. It serves a purpose and helps many. These RWNJ have an axe to grind with virtual.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They are regurgitating what "Dr." Reesman posted attacking the school. Her data on enrollment isn't accurate and the data she is using is expected projected growth but its common kids go up and down or stay stagnant and that's not always a true measure.

Why the scare quotes?

Does she not have a doctorate in the field you are discussing?

DP but no? She doesn't..her PhD is in neuropsych. That doesnt make her an expert in the field being discussed. She clearly loves to pretend it does though. Anyone who unironically calls themself "Wonder Woman" is questionable to begin with.

So, we’re also going to dismiss other neuropsych PhDs who comment on education, right?

Yes, she has no experience with this school and is bashing and attacking it for no reason. It has zero impact on her or her kids. She should put as much effort into her kids she does her posts.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Here it is again...parents in this county are so behind the times. Most districts across the country have offered virtual options since the early aughts. The fact MCPS only did in 2020 because of the pandemic is embarrassing. It's time to join the rest of the country in the 21st century without complaining because remote instruction didn't work for your kid during the pandemic. It's so absurd.

Just curious- how many of the virtual programs "across the country" are actually offered at the district level? Particularly in pre-pandemic times. Quite often the virtual programs are administered at the state level, which makes sense to me. So this is partly on the state of MD.

DP-I would first say, do your own research before asking others to do it for you. But all of my teaching friends from my program are in various states and it is offered at the district level. So, no. It's not on the state of Maryland at all. It could be implemented district wide as its done in MANY other places. MoCo has a unique set of parents that simply refuse to hear any other alternatives other than "in-person". It is sad because instead of using the money and time to refine a district wide program, people just want to shut it down because of the pandemic. All of the parents who continue to post this article on social media are the same exact parents who were at every single board meeting complaining about virtual. Doesn't take a genius to figure out their agenda. It is quite sad and pathetic.

Lady, well before the pandemic there was research showing that virtual doesn’t even work for college students. Anyone with a single brain cell knows it’s a disaster for children, and yes, we know this because of the pandemic There is an extremely narrow case for it as a stop-gap for sick kids and SN kids who truly cannot be accomodated at their current placement, but it is not a long-term solution.

My kids did great in virtual. I think the problem is mostly with parents who left young children unsupervised and expected better results. The problem isn't virtual but lazy parents.

How dare those parents work to feed their families! Who needs housing anyway?

And yet we all seem to manage caring for our kids unlike you.

Congratulations on being a single income family or having complete schedule autonomy in your job so you can work around your kids educational schedule. You do realize you were in the complete statistical minority in United States

Or, maybe you should consider your family schedule to be home with your kids or hire a nanny to raise your kids since you are struggling so much.

If I work in a hire, a nanny would absolutely not be so that my kid could do virtual academy. I don't understand why that's a benefit to my kid at all

Maybe you should be around more for your kids. It's a benefit if that learning style works best for your child or they are unhappy in person or have other reasons. But, clearly your needs come first in your home.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Here it is again...parents in this county are so behind the times. Most districts across the country have offered virtual options since the early aughts. The fact MCPS only did in 2020 because of the pandemic is embarrassing. It's time to join the rest of the country in the 21st century without complaining because remote instruction didn't work for your kid during the pandemic. It's so absurd.

Just curious- how many of the virtual programs "across the country" are actually offered at the district level? Particularly in pre-pandemic times. Quite often the virtual programs are administered at the state level, which makes sense to me. So this is partly on the state of MD.

DP-I would first say, do your own research before asking others to do it for you. But all of my teaching friends from my program are in various states and it is offered at the district level. So, no. It's not on the state of Maryland at all. It could be implemented district wide as its done in MANY other places. MoCo has a unique set of parents that simply refuse to hear any other alternatives other than "in-person". It is sad because instead of using the money and time to refine a district wide program, people just want to shut it down because of the pandemic. All of the parents who continue to post this article on social media are the same exact parents who were at every single board meeting complaining about virtual. Doesn't take a genius to figure out their agenda. It is quite sad and pathetic.

Lady, well before the pandemic there was research showing that virtual doesn’t even work for college students. Anyone with a single brain cell knows it’s a disaster for children, and yes, we know this because of the pandemic There is an extremely narrow case for it as a stop-gap for sick kids and SN kids who truly cannot be accomodated at their current placement, but it is not a long-term solution.

My kids did great in virtual. I think the problem is mostly with parents who left young children unsupervised and expected better results. The problem isn't virtual but lazy parents.

How dare those parents work to feed their families! Who needs housing anyway?

Those kids shouldn’t be left unsupervised at home to fend for themselves.

Oh I agree. They should have been in school.

They ARE in school. Its sad you simply don't get it and are trying to justify your hate for options for families because you want free child care and think everyone else needs it.

They are chronically absent, not in school.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Here it is again...parents in this county are so behind the times. Most districts across the country have offered virtual options since the early aughts. The fact MCPS only did in 2020 because of the pandemic is embarrassing. It's time to join the rest of the country in the 21st century without complaining because remote instruction didn't work for your kid during the pandemic. It's so absurd.

Just curious- how many of the virtual programs "across the country" are actually offered at the district level? Particularly in pre-pandemic times. Quite often the virtual programs are administered at the state level, which makes sense to me. So this is partly on the state of MD.

DP-I would first say, do your own research before asking others to do it for you. But all of my teaching friends from my program are in various states and it is offered at the district level. So, no. It's not on the state of Maryland at all. It could be implemented district wide as its done in MANY other places. MoCo has a unique set of parents that simply refuse to hear any other alternatives other than "in-person". It is sad because instead of using the money and time to refine a district wide program, people just want to shut it down because of the pandemic. All of the parents who continue to post this article on social media are the same exact parents who were at every single board meeting complaining about virtual. Doesn't take a genius to figure out their agenda. It is quite sad and pathetic.

Lady, well before the pandemic there was research showing that virtual doesn’t even work for college students. Anyone with a single brain cell knows it’s a disaster for children, and yes, we know this because of the pandemic There is an extremely narrow case for it as a stop-gap for sick kids and SN kids who truly cannot be accomodated at their current placement, but it is not a long-term solution.

My kids did great in virtual. I think the problem is mostly with parents who left young children unsupervised and expected better results. The problem isn't virtual but lazy parents.

How dare those parents work to feed their families! Who needs housing anyway?

Those kids shouldn’t be left unsupervised at home to fend for themselves.

Oh I agree. They should have been in school.

They ARE in school. Its sad you simply don't get it and are trying to justify your hate for options for families because you want free child care and think everyone else needs it.

They are chronically absent, not in school.

Kids who are chronically absent would be in either style school and often the kids are marked absent when they are not. We’ve had it happen many times and sometimes don’t bother to correct it

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They are regurgitating what "Dr." Reesman posted attacking the school. Her data on enrollment isn't accurate and the data she is using is expected projected growth but its common kids go up and down or stay stagnant and that's not always a true measure.

Why the scare quotes?

Does she not have a doctorate in the field you are discussing?

DP but no? She doesn't..her PhD is in neuropsych. That doesnt make her an expert in the field being discussed. She clearly loves to pretend it does though. Anyone who unironically calls themself "Wonder Woman" is questionable to begin with.

So, we’re also going to dismiss other neuropsych PhDs who comment on education, right?

Yes, she has no experience with this school and is bashing and attacking it for no reason. It has zero impact on her or her kids. She should put as much effort into her kids she does her posts.

No reason? You can argue about the value of VA, but when you look at MCPS's data you can't claim there's no reason to be concerned about VA.

[Anonymous]

Why in the world would MCPS hide the enrollment data when the number is less than 10? That sort of thing is usually done for privacy reasons, but in this case it doesn't seem to have a useful purpose other than to obfuscate the data.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They are regurgitating what "Dr." Reesman posted attacking the school. Her data on enrollment isn't accurate and the data she is using is expected projected growth but its common kids go up and down or stay stagnant and that's not always a true measure.

Why the scare quotes?

Does she not have a doctorate in the field you are discussing?

DP but no? She doesn't..her PhD is in neuropsych. That doesnt make her an expert in the field being discussed. She clearly loves to pretend it does though. Anyone who unironically calls themself "Wonder Woman" is questionable to begin with.

So, we’re also going to dismiss other neuropsych PhDs who comment on education, right?

Yes, she has no experience with this school and is bashing and attacking it for no reason. It has zero impact on her or her kids. She should put as much effort into her kids she does her posts.

No reason? You can argue about the value of VA, but when you look at MCPS's data you can't claim there's no reason to be concerned about VA.

That data isn’t accurate.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Why in the world would MCPS hide the enrollment data when the number is less than 10? That sort of thing is usually done for privacy reasons, but in this case it doesn't seem to have a useful purpose other than to obfuscate the data.

It’s hard to say. It is weird but I don’t understand why that woman needs information about what the kids homeschools are. Just give an enrollment number.