Do you think there will be any in-person learning this spring?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Yeah, we did that. Montgomery County was pretty much shut down for two months in the spring.

It didn’t make a difference for the teacher union.

Summer happened. Then Fall happened. Now Winter is happening. Things haven't gotten better. Quite the opposite. No one has the balls for a serious shut down again.

The point is things were good going into the fall semester. But schools still didn't open. It's never going to be enough for MCEA until there's zero cases. They're not acting in good faith during reopening negotiations. MCPS should leave them out of the discussions and let them decide later if they want to keep their jobs.

Almost all big school districts in the US didn't open. Is that MCEA's fault?

Currently, about half of students in the US are doing Zoom school only. Is that MCEA's fault?

We're not talking about other districts. We're talking about MCPS. I don't know what specific decisions other districts made, what led to them, or what community spread is in those communities. What is known, however, is that MCPS has among the strictest requirements for returning to classrooms.

If we’re not talking about other districts, why bring up that MCPS is the strictest?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If it makes you feel any better, that is what MCPS seems to be leaning towards if you believe the leaks and vague comments made at board meetings.

Then why did they set thresholds for hybrid school?

Same reason people close for "deep cleanings" - to appease certain people.

Ok, but we are going to hit those thresholds this spring. I think at that point they will have to reopen for those who indicated they wanted hybrid.

I also think we are going to hit the required metrics in the spring so that the people who opted for in person will be able to send their kids in person for the last quarter. At the last BOE meeting they implied that because less than 50% opted for in person it may not be just a 2 day a week schedule.

Ooh that would be so great!! Though I imagine it would vary by school.

I didn’t pay too much attention to what they said about HS (my kids are in ES) but they also indicated that in order to balance the numbers in the schools they may seek to move ES kids around. To me, that seemed to say that if every school was operating at less than 50% capacity there is no reason that they can’t operate on more than a 2 day a week in person schedule. One of the BOE members also made the comment that they hope they can do more than 2 days a week. I would not be surprised when they get down to the nuts and bolts of the return that it will be more than 2 days a week because only half of the student body will be in person.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Yeah, we did that. Montgomery County was pretty much shut down for two months in the spring.

It didn’t make a difference for the teacher union.

Summer happened. Then Fall happened. Now Winter is happening. Things haven't gotten better. Quite the opposite. No one has the balls for a serious shut down again.

The point is things were good going into the fall semester. But schools still didn't open. It's never going to be enough for MCEA until there's zero cases. They're not acting in good faith during reopening negotiations. MCPS should leave them out of the discussions and let them decide later if they want to keep their jobs.

Almost all big school districts in the US didn't open. Is that MCEA's fault?

Currently, about half of students in the US are doing Zoom school only. Is that MCEA's fault?

We're not talking about other districts. We're talking about MCPS. I don't know what specific decisions other districts made, what led to them, or what community spread is in those communities. What is known, however, is that MCPS has among the strictest requirements for returning to classrooms.

MCPS made the same decision that lots of other school districts did. Maybe MCPS made that same decision for unique reasons, completely different from all of the other school districts, but it seems rather unlikely.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Howard county is already talking about 12/21 at best (we stink also over here and don’t believe in doing anything for kids)

What? Are you serious?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:At my middle school at least, it would be two days in person and two at home. But everyone on a screen anyway. No group work around a single table.

Same at high school. No hands on projects, no group work. Basically just a chrome book or a worksheet at your desk.

You’ve heard this directly from your schools? I haven’t heard about any in person plans from our middle school.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If it makes you feel any better, that is what MCPS seems to be leaning towards if you believe the leaks and vague comments made at board meetings.

Then why did they set thresholds for hybrid school?

Same reason people close for "deep cleanings" - to appease certain people.

Ok, but we are going to hit those thresholds this spring. I think at that point they will have to reopen for those who indicated they wanted hybrid.

I also think we are going to hit the required metrics in the spring so that the people who opted for in person will be able to send their kids in person for the last quarter. At the last BOE meeting they implied that because less than 50% opted for in person it may not be just a 2 day a week schedule.

Ooh that would be so great!! Though I imagine it would vary by school.

I didn’t pay too much attention to what they said about HS (my kids are in ES) but they also indicated that in order to balance the numbers in the schools they may seek to move ES kids around. To me, that seemed to say that if every school was operating at less than 50% capacity there is no reason that they can’t operate on more than a 2 day a week in person schedule. One of the BOE members also made the comment that they hope they can do more than 2 days a week. I would not be surprised when they get down to the nuts and bolts of the return that it will be more than 2 days a week because only half of the student body will be in person.

There wouldn't be space in other ES so they'd have to take space at MS or HS to do that. So, if they do 4 days a week in the ES schools, what happens to all the kids for the 3 other days who are currently going to the equity hubs and child care at the MCPS ES already? Parents gain two days in person but lose 3 days?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Back to OP: not a chance in hell do I think there will be any in-person learning for the 20-21 school year.

Sadly I agree. The board is too incompetent and moco parents are just taking it in the bum without complaint for the most part. It shocks me that my neighbors and friends are literally just like “ oh well guess Larla won’t have first grade in person. It’s a pandemic.” Nevermind that we are almost a year in and kids are going to school all over the country (not the majority yes but a lot of kids in a lot of normal places). It’s maddening. So yes. Back to the question. No school this year because moco parents are apparently fine with kids being home on the chrome book for more than a year.

Actually many are DL and those that open have opened/closed multiple times and/or have DL/Hybrid to keep numbers down.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:At my middle school at least, it would be two days in person and two at home. But everyone on a screen anyway. No group work around a single table.

Same at high school. No hands on projects, no group work. Basically just a chrome book or a worksheet at your desk.

Lectures and independent work may look much the same but whatever else may happen, group discussions are more effective in person than via zoom.

Not when the group is spaced 3-6 feet apart. Some members in groups will likely need to be in DL.

This is clearly written by someone that doesn't have a job that includes videoconferences.

Being spread out is fine for discussions. And yes, the discussion go much, much better in-person. People are generally much more engaged.

If kids had camera's on and participated it would work fine.

Safety means kids spaced out 6-10 feet, not 3.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If it makes you feel any better, that is what MCPS seems to be leaning towards if you believe the leaks and vague comments made at board meetings.

Then why did they set thresholds for hybrid school?

Same reason people close for "deep cleanings" - to appease certain people.

Ok, but we are going to hit those thresholds this spring. I think at that point they will have to reopen for those who indicated they wanted hybrid.

I also think we are going to hit the required metrics in the spring so that the people who opted for in person will be able to send their kids in person for the last quarter. At the last BOE meeting they implied that because less than 50% opted for in person it may not be just a 2 day a week schedule.

Ooh that would be so great!! Though I imagine it would vary by school.

I didn’t pay too much attention to what they said about HS (my kids are in ES) but they also indicated that in order to balance the numbers in the schools they may seek to move ES kids around. To me, that seemed to say that if every school was operating at less than 50% capacity there is no reason that they can’t operate on more than a 2 day a week in person schedule. One of the BOE members also made the comment that they hope they can do more than 2 days a week. I would not be surprised when they get down to the nuts and bolts of the return that it will be more than 2 days a week because only half of the student body will be in person.

There wouldn't be space in other ES so they'd have to take space at MS or HS to do that. So, if they do 4 days a week in the ES schools, what happens to all the kids for the 3 other days who are currently going to the equity hubs and child care at the MCPS ES already? Parents gain two days in person but lose 3 days?

My understanding is that there are some ES where 70% of people wanted in person and there are some schools where only 30% opted for in person. It was not a 50/50 split for every school. So that is why they may shift some ES kids around to balance the numbers. It is possible that for the people who opted for in person that their kids could end up attending another ES temporarily in order to balance the numbers. We haven’t heard what will happen to the learning hubs operating in the schools once kids come back in person, but it stands to reason that if you were comfortable enough to have been sending your kid to a learning hub all along you probably opted for in person learning, so the need for the learning hubs will be minimal if the kids whose parents opted for in person will be attending full time as opposed to 2 days a week. The whole point of hybrid was to reduce the number of people in the building, and for this school year there will only be a max of 50% of the kids in person if/when they do go back.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:And if so, it’s just twice a week hybrid (half days) - right?

I would hope not. That would be a death sentence for so many of our hardworking teachers. This isn't acceptable.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:At my middle school at least, it would be two days in person and two at home. But everyone on a screen anyway. No group work around a single table.

Same at high school. No hands on projects, no group work. Basically just a chrome book or a worksheet at your desk.

You’ve heard this directly from your schools? I haven’t heard about any in person plans from our middle school.

I’m the MS teacher above. I asked directly because early MP 3 includes a unit project that we have always done in groups. I have to arrange some parts of it about a month in advance to make sure it runs smoothly from the start. I figured that I should pad the prep time a bit because everything moves slower these days. I asked and the response was what I posted.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:At my middle school at least, it would be two days in person and two at home. But everyone on a screen anyway. No group work around a single table.

Same at high school. No hands on projects, no group work. Basically just a chrome book or a worksheet at your desk.

Lectures and independent work may look much the same but whatever else may happen, group discussions are more effective in person than via zoom.

Not when the group is spaced 3-6 feet apart. Some members in groups will likely need to be in DL.

This is clearly written by someone that doesn't have a job that includes videoconferences.

Being spread out is fine for discussions. And yes, the discussion go much, much better in-person. People are generally much more engaged.

If kids had camera's on and participated it would work fine.

Safety means kids spaced out 6-10 feet, not 3.

There's nothing special about 3 vs. 6 vs. 10.

The 6 foot rule-of-thumb was derived from how far droplets travel without masks. We've been applying them more broadly because we didn't really know what else to to. But it would be wrong to assume 6-10ft is ok but 3ft is not OK. The reality is much more nuanced than that.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Yeah, we did that. Montgomery County was pretty much shut down for two months in the spring.

It didn’t make a difference for the teacher union.

Summer happened. Then Fall happened. Now Winter is happening. Things haven't gotten better. Quite the opposite. No one has the balls for a serious shut down again.

The point is things were good going into the fall semester. But schools still didn't open. It's never going to be enough for MCEA until there's zero cases. They're not acting in good faith during reopening negotiations. MCPS should leave them out of the discussions and let them decide later if they want to keep their jobs.

Almost all big school districts in the US didn't open. Is that MCEA's fault?

Currently, about half of students in the US are doing Zoom school only. Is that MCEA's fault?

We're not talking about other districts. We're talking about MCPS. I don't know what specific decisions other districts made, what led to them, or what community spread is in those communities. What is known, however, is that MCPS has among the strictest requirements for returning to classrooms.

MCPS made the same decision that lots of other school districts did. Maybe MCPS made that same decision for unique reasons, completely different from all of the other school districts, but it seems rather unlikely.

They didn't make the same decision. They set their metrics much lower. Our level of community spread was low enough that many other districts would have reopened.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:At my middle school at least, it would be two days in person and two at home. But everyone on a screen anyway. No group work around a single table.

Same at high school. No hands on projects, no group work. Basically just a chrome book or a worksheet at your desk.

Lectures and independent work may look much the same but whatever else may happen, group discussions are more effective in person than via zoom.

Not when the group is spaced 3-6 feet apart. Some members in groups will likely need to be in DL.

This is clearly written by someone that doesn't have a job that includes videoconferences.

Being spread out is fine for discussions. And yes, the discussion go much, much better in-person. People are generally much more engaged.

If kids had camera's on and participated it would work fine.

Safety means kids spaced out 6-10 feet, not 3.

There's nothing special about 3 vs. 6 vs. 10.

The 6 foot rule-of-thumb was derived from how far droplets travel without masks. We've been applying them more broadly because we didn't really know what else to to. But it would be wrong to assume 6-10ft is ok but 3ft is not OK. The reality is much more nuanced than that.

Yep. Especially if people are wearing masks.

6 feet if no masks. But with masks, you can be in closer.

How do you think dentists have been safely practicing since the summer??

[Anonymous]

Maybe 3 feet would be fine if students kept their masks on. Except there’s no consequence for unmasking.