What time is Duran's announcement today?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We’re in the upper elementary group, so lessons will be concurrent. We chose distance learning rather than hybrid and I’m secretly hoping my kid’s teacher will remain virtual (medical exemption?) and the classrooms will have monitors. Is that possible, or will it only be in extraordinary circumstances where some sort of waiver is granted? Would they notify parents in advance?

It’s possible, but highly unlikely. APS supposedly is taking a very strict approach to ADA accommodations now.

APS should follow the law, period. As long as it’s doing that, no one should complain.

I don’t know the laws around ADA but it APS seems to be denying most people that apply. The classroom monitor thing that fcps is doing seems to be less common in APS because fcps approved way more ADA requests.

A bit backwards in reality. APS tried to hire monitors to provide those accommodations, but didn't get enough..thus they started denying requests. They actually claim they gave them, but said: "you are provided the short-term telework accommodation until students return to school" and.."extending your accommodation will harm the organization when students return"

Teachers who have had transplants, or are currently receiving chemo, have been denied. Vaccinations might mean some people with legit CDC high-risk from Covid health issues, might be okay returning, but others either won't be despite vaccine, or can't get vaccine due to their health issues.

“Receiving chemo” can mean a lot of things. Certain types of skin cancer are treated with topical chemo, for instance, which doesn’t have the same immune effects of other forms of chemo.

True, but you are kind of missing the overall point .

How do? My point is that a lot of people are putting stories about how they were denied accommodations for dire conditions, but many of them are at best very questionable requests when you think about them for more than a moment. I sympathize with people who are concerned about going back, but that doesn’t necessarily mean their situation warrants an accommodation.

I am a teacher who was denied. Legit High risk via CDC..not what you were saying, which were issues not on the CDC list. If I were in FCPS I would be approved. I was approved in Arlington, until they couldn't hire enough monitors. My accommodation was thus as described "telework until students return" "it will be a burden to the organization if your 'accommodation' extends after kids return" "You can resign, take unpaid leave, or return". I fortunately will be vaccinated, and while not totally comfortable due to my legit high risk issue, I am going to return. I can't afford the other options. I know many colleagues in similar circumstances. Yes, there are folks caring for others, or breastfeeding, and those aren't on the CDC list. My point, remains...those with high risk conditions listed on the CDC are being denied in APS, while those with the same issues were approved in FCPS.

What is your ultimate goal here? COVID is never going away. If you are vaccinated but still cannot be around other people, how can you work anywhere?

Um, I said I was returning because I will be vaccinated. Yes, I still feel a bit uncomfortable...could possibly still transmit to others i.e family and friends. My ultimate goal? For you to understand the issue of some people with legit issues being denied in one district, while not being denied in another. That not all those being denied will get vaccinated, and thus will be more at risk. And, these aren't "stories" but real people, with real concerns. I do miss my students, and do think in person is best, meaning I wouldn't teach virtually if Covid didn't exist.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Does anyone know if k-2 will need to bring their iPads to in person class?

The email from our principal indicated all students should plan to bring their iPads every day.

They are going to be in front of iPads all day.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Does anyone know if k-2 will need to bring their iPads to in person class?

Yes they will- they won’t be doing concurrent so they won’t be on iPads all day but they will need them for specials at a minimum and probably more.

Thank you to everyone that answered. I appreciate your responses. Logically I realize someone from the school, most likely our teacher, will get in touch but it’s nice to have that mentally sorted as we head into next month.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We’re in the upper elementary group, so lessons will be concurrent. We chose distance learning rather than hybrid and I’m secretly hoping my kid’s teacher will remain virtual (medical exemption?) and the classrooms will have monitors. Is that possible, or will it only be in extraordinary circumstances where some sort of waiver is granted? Would they notify parents in advance?

It’s possible, but highly unlikely. APS supposedly is taking a very strict approach to ADA accommodations now.

APS should follow the law, period. As long as it’s doing that, no one should complain.

I don’t know the laws around ADA but it APS seems to be denying most people that apply. The classroom monitor thing that fcps is doing seems to be less common in APS because fcps approved way more ADA requests.

A bit backwards in reality. APS tried to hire monitors to provide those accommodations, but didn't get enough..thus they started denying requests. They actually claim they gave them, but said: "you are provided the short-term telework accommodation until students return to school" and.."extending your accommodation will harm the organization when students return"

Teachers who have had transplants, or are currently receiving chemo, have been denied. Vaccinations might mean some people with legit CDC high-risk from Covid health issues, might be okay returning, but others either won't be despite vaccine, or can't get vaccine due to their health issues.

“Receiving chemo” can mean a lot of things. Certain types of skin cancer are treated with topical chemo, for instance, which doesn’t have the same immune effects of other forms of chemo.

True, but you are kind of missing the overall point .

How do? My point is that a lot of people are putting stories about how they were denied accommodations for dire conditions, but many of them are at best very questionable requests when you think about them for more than a moment. I sympathize with people who are concerned about going back, but that doesn’t necessarily mean their situation warrants an accommodation.

I am a teacher who was denied. Legit High risk via CDC..not what you were saying, which were issues not on the CDC list. If I were in FCPS I would be approved. I was approved in Arlington, until they couldn't hire enough monitors. My accommodation was thus as described "telework until students return" "it will be a burden to the organization if your 'accommodation' extends after kids return" "You can resign, take unpaid leave, or return". I fortunately will be vaccinated, and while not totally comfortable due to my legit high risk issue, I am going to return. I can't afford the other options. I know many colleagues in similar circumstances. Yes, there are folks caring for others, or breastfeeding, and those aren't on the CDC list. My point, remains...those with high risk conditions listed on the CDC are being denied in APS, while those with the same issues were approved in FCPS.

What is your ultimate goal here? COVID is never going away. If you are vaccinated but still cannot be around other people, how can you work anywhere?

Um, I said I was returning because I will be vaccinated. Yes, I still feel a bit uncomfortable...could possibly still transmit to others i.e family and friends. My ultimate goal? For you to understand the issue of some people with legit issues being denied in one district, while not being denied in another. That not all those being denied will get vaccinated, and thus will be more at risk. And, these aren't "stories" but real people, with real concerns. I do miss my students, and do think in person is best, meaning I wouldn't teach virtually if Covid didn't exist.

I get that people have legitimate issues. I’m only trying to say that some of those issues quality for ADA accommodation and some don’t. But if people won’t get vaccinated, then they need to decide what type of employment they want to have other than a job that should be in person. And I understand people have concerns but it’s been an entire year now and it’s time for APS to go back like all of the other surrounding jurisdictions.

[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:We’re in the upper elementary group, so lessons will be concurrent. We chose distance learning rather than hybrid and I’m secretly hoping my kid’s teacher will remain virtual (medical exemption?) and the classrooms will have monitors. Is that possible, or will it only be in extraordinary circumstances where some sort of waiver is granted? Would they notify parents in advance?

It’s possible, but highly unlikely. APS supposedly is taking a very strict approach to ADA accommodations now.

APS should follow the law, period. As long as it’s doing that, no one should complain.

I don’t know the laws around ADA but it APS seems to be denying most people that apply. The classroom monitor thing that fcps is doing seems to be less common in APS because fcps approved way more ADA requests.

A bit backwards in reality. APS tried to hire monitors to provide those accommodations, but didn't get enough..thus they started denying requests. They actually claim they gave them, but said: "you are provided the short-term telework accommodation until students return to school" and.."extending your accommodation will harm the organization when students return"

Teachers who have had transplants, or are currently receiving chemo, have been denied. Vaccinations might mean some people with legit CDC high-risk from Covid health issues, might be okay returning, but others either won't be despite vaccine, or can't get vaccine due to their health issues.

“Receiving chemo” can mean a lot of things. Certain types of skin cancer are treated with topical chemo, for instance, which doesn’t have the same immune effects of other forms of chemo.

True, but you are kind of missing the overall point .

How do? My point is that a lot of people are putting stories about how they were denied accommodations for dire conditions, but many of them are at best very questionable requests when you think about them for more than a moment. I sympathize with people who are concerned about going back, but that doesn’t necessarily mean their situation warrants an accommodation.

I am a teacher who was denied. Legit High risk via CDC..not what you were saying, which were issues not on the CDC list. If I were in FCPS I would be approved. I was approved in Arlington, until they couldn't hire enough monitors. My accommodation was thus as described "telework until students return" "it will be a burden to the organization if your 'accommodation' extends after kids return" "You can resign, take unpaid leave, or return". I fortunately will be vaccinated, and while not totally comfortable due to my legit high risk issue, I am going to return. I can't afford the other options. I know many colleagues in similar circumstances. Yes, there are folks caring for others, or breastfeeding, and those aren't on the CDC list. My point, remains...those with high risk conditions listed on the CDC are being denied in APS, while those with the same issues were approved in FCPS.

What is your ultimate goal here? COVID is never going away. If you are vaccinated but still cannot be around other people, how can you work anywhere?

Um, I said I was returning because I will be vaccinated. Yes, I still feel a bit uncomfortable...could possibly still transmit to others i.e family and friends. My ultimate goal? For you to understand the issue of some people with legit issues being denied in one district, while not being denied in another. That not all those being denied will get vaccinated, and thus will be more at risk. And, these aren't "stories" but real people, with real concerns. I do miss my students, and do think in person is best, meaning I wouldn't teach virtually if Covid didn't exist.

I get that people have legitimate issues. I’m only trying to say that some of those issues quality for ADA accommodation and some don’t. But if people won’t get vaccinated, then they need to decide what type of employment they want to have other than a job that should be in person. And I understand people have concerns but it’s been an entire year now and it’s time for APS to go back like all of the other surrounding jurisdictions.

Shhhhhhhhhhh

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Does anyone know if k-2 will need to bring their iPads to in person class?

The email from our principal indicated all students should plan to bring their iPads every day.

They are going to be in front of iPads all day.

Not according to our principal. Bonus- much more small group work.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Does anyone know if k-2 will need to bring their iPads to in person class?

The email from our principal indicated all students should plan to bring their iPads every day.

They are going to be in front of iPads all day.

Not according to our principal. Bonus- much more small group work.

We heard the same tonight. Kids will be in rotations (some self paced choice boards, some time in apps like Lexia) but there will also be paper work for kids in class AND at home.

[Anonymous]

How can there be small group work when the teacher can’t leave the desk?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:How can there be small group work when the teacher can’t leave the desk?

I think that will apply to older grades.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We’re in the upper elementary group, so lessons will be concurrent. We chose distance learning rather than hybrid and I’m secretly hoping my kid’s teacher will remain virtual (medical exemption?) and the classrooms will have monitors. Is that possible, or will it only be in extraordinary circumstances where some sort of waiver is granted? Would they notify parents in advance?

It’s possible, but highly unlikely. APS supposedly is taking a very strict approach to ADA accommodations now.

APS should follow the law, period. As long as it’s doing that, no one should complain.

I don’t know the laws around ADA but it APS seems to be denying most people that apply. The classroom monitor thing that fcps is doing seems to be less common in APS because fcps approved way more ADA requests.

A bit backwards in reality. APS tried to hire monitors to provide those accommodations, but didn't get enough..thus they started denying requests. They actually claim they gave them, but said: "you are provided the short-term telework accommodation until students return to school" and.."extending your accommodation will harm the organization when students return"

Teachers who have had transplants, or are currently receiving chemo, have been denied. Vaccinations might mean some people with legit CDC high-risk from Covid health issues, might be okay returning, but others either won't be despite vaccine, or can't get vaccine due to their health issues.

Honest question—do you know this firsthand? The person/people currently receiving chemo should be maybe on medical leave anyway...But it would surprise me if they denied someone post-transplant (and also, would be surprised if there are a large number of APS teachers who are transplant recipients). For the “CDC high-risk” folks, I understand the concern but, to be fair, having hypertension or a high BMI are not disabilities and if they were, we really should be picketing outside of every grocery store in the land bc I promise you people are working there every day who are also in CDC high-risk categories. But I am concerned if APS is denying WFH to employees going through cancer treatment.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We’re in the upper elementary group, so lessons will be concurrent. We chose distance learning rather than hybrid and I’m secretly hoping my kid’s teacher will remain virtual (medical exemption?) and the classrooms will have monitors. Is that possible, or will it only be in extraordinary circumstances where some sort of waiver is granted? Would they notify parents in advance?

It’s possible, but highly unlikely. APS supposedly is taking a very strict approach to ADA accommodations now.

APS should follow the law, period. As long as it’s doing that, no one should complain.

I don’t know the laws around ADA but it APS seems to be denying most people that apply. The classroom monitor thing that fcps is doing seems to be less common in APS because fcps approved way more ADA requests.

A bit backwards in reality. APS tried to hire monitors to provide those accommodations, but didn't get enough..thus they started denying requests. They actually claim they gave them, but said: "you are provided the short-term telework accommodation until students return to school" and.."extending your accommodation will harm the organization when students return"

Teachers who have had transplants, or are currently receiving chemo, have been denied. Vaccinations might mean some people with legit CDC high-risk from Covid health issues, might be okay returning, but others either won't be despite vaccine, or can't get vaccine due to their health issues.

Honest question—do you know this firsthand? The person/people currently receiving chemo should be maybe on medical leave anyway...But it would surprise me if they denied someone post-transplant (and also, would be surprised if there are a large number of APS teachers who are transplant recipients). For the “CDC high-risk” folks, I understand the concern but, to be fair, having hypertension or a high BMI are not disabilities and if they were, we really should be picketing outside of every grocery store in the land bc I promise you people are working there every day who are also in CDC high-risk categories. But I am concerned if APS is denying WFH to employees going through cancer treatment.

an essential job function of teachers is teaching in person. Prior to the pandemic nobody would have thought differently. The idea that students could be in person and a teacher could be broadcast into the classroom, as a regular way of doing business, is, quite frankly, absurd. Sure- there have been classes taught like this, e.g. when there was not enough enrollment to justify a teacher, and the school uses a distance method for a teacher in another area-- but those are classes that the students opt into, and the benefits are more than the downside.

The ADA simply does not require an employer to redefine the essential functions of the job- it requires an employer to provide accommodations that allow a person with a disability to perform the essential functions of their job. Yes, the ADA would most likely require leave as an accommodation, but not 'teaching remotely.' I'm surprised that any of these requests are being approved. Approving even one puts the school system at risk b/c then the school system has in fact started to lose the principle that teaching in person is an essential function.

[Anonymous]

How can there be small group work when the teacher can’t leave the desk?

Exactly. All this talk about choice boards and teaching one group at a time is coming from people who have never done concurrent learning.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We’re in the upper elementary group, so lessons will be concurrent. We chose distance learning rather than hybrid and I’m secretly hoping my kid’s teacher will remain virtual (medical exemption?) and the classrooms will have monitors. Is that possible, or will it only be in extraordinary circumstances where some sort of waiver is granted? Would they notify parents in advance?

It’s possible, but highly unlikely. APS supposedly is taking a very strict approach to ADA accommodations now.

APS should follow the law, period. As long as it’s doing that, no one should complain.

I don’t know the laws around ADA but it APS seems to be denying most people that apply. The classroom monitor thing that fcps is doing seems to be less common in APS because fcps approved way more ADA requests.

A bit backwards in reality. APS tried to hire monitors to provide those accommodations, but didn't get enough..thus they started denying requests. They actually claim they gave them, but said: "you are provided the short-term telework accommodation until students return to school" and.."extending your accommodation will harm the organization when students return"

Teachers who have had transplants, or are currently receiving chemo, have been denied. Vaccinations might mean some people with legit CDC high-risk from Covid health issues, might be okay returning, but others either won't be despite vaccine, or can't get vaccine due to their health issues.

Honest question—do you know this firsthand? The person/people currently receiving chemo should be maybe on medical leave anyway...But it would surprise me if they denied someone post-transplant (and also, would be surprised if there are a large number of APS teachers who are transplant recipients). For the “CDC high-risk” folks, I understand the concern but, to be fair, having hypertension or a high BMI are not disabilities and if they were, we really should be picketing outside of every grocery store in the land bc I promise you people are working there every day who are also in CDC high-risk categories. But I am concerned if APS is denying WFH to employees going through cancer treatment.

Yes, I know first hand. Transplant recipients were denied. Despite being on immunosuppressant drugs etc.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We’re in the upper elementary group, so lessons will be concurrent. We chose distance learning rather than hybrid and I’m secretly hoping my kid’s teacher will remain virtual (medical exemption?) and the classrooms will have monitors. Is that possible, or will it only be in extraordinary circumstances where some sort of waiver is granted? Would they notify parents in advance?

It’s possible, but highly unlikely. APS supposedly is taking a very strict approach to ADA accommodations now.

APS should follow the law, period. As long as it’s doing that, no one should complain.

I don’t know the laws around ADA but it APS seems to be denying most people that apply. The classroom monitor thing that fcps is doing seems to be less common in APS because fcps approved way more ADA requests.

A bit backwards in reality. APS tried to hire monitors to provide those accommodations, but didn't get enough..thus they started denying requests. They actually claim they gave them, but said: "you are provided the short-term telework accommodation until students return to school" and.."extending your accommodation will harm the organization when students return"

Teachers who have had transplants, or are currently receiving chemo, have been denied. Vaccinations might mean some people with legit CDC high-risk from Covid health issues, might be okay returning, but others either won't be despite vaccine, or can't get vaccine due to their health issues.

Honest question—do you know this firsthand? The person/people currently receiving chemo should be maybe on medical leave anyway...But it would surprise me if they denied someone post-transplant (and also, would be surprised if there are a large number of APS teachers who are transplant recipients). For the “CDC high-risk” folks, I understand the concern but, to be fair, having hypertension or a high BMI are not disabilities and if they were, we really should be picketing outside of every grocery store in the land bc I promise you people are working there every day who are also in CDC high-risk categories. But I am concerned if APS is denying WFH to employees going through cancer treatment.

Yes, I know first hand. Transplant recipients were denied. Despite being on immunosuppressant drugs etc.

So, not to be obtuse, but by firsthand, you mean this is happening to you? Are you vaccinated? I just can’t see them denying transplant recipients (nor can I see this being more than a couple of APS employees).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We’re in the upper elementary group, so lessons will be concurrent. We chose distance learning rather than hybrid and I’m secretly hoping my kid’s teacher will remain virtual (medical exemption?) and the classrooms will have monitors. Is that possible, or will it only be in extraordinary circumstances where some sort of waiver is granted? Would they notify parents in advance?

It’s possible, but highly unlikely. APS supposedly is taking a very strict approach to ADA accommodations now.

APS should follow the law, period. As long as it’s doing that, no one should complain.

I don’t know the laws around ADA but it APS seems to be denying most people that apply. The classroom monitor thing that fcps is doing seems to be less common in APS because fcps approved way more ADA requests.

A bit backwards in reality. APS tried to hire monitors to provide those accommodations, but didn't get enough..thus they started denying requests. They actually claim they gave them, but said: "you are provided the short-term telework accommodation until students return to school" and.."extending your accommodation will harm the organization when students return"

Teachers who have had transplants, or are currently receiving chemo, have been denied. Vaccinations might mean some people with legit CDC high-risk from Covid health issues, might be okay returning, but others either won't be despite vaccine, or can't get vaccine due to their health issues.

Honest question—do you know this firsthand? The person/people currently receiving chemo should be maybe on medical leave anyway...But it would surprise me if they denied someone post-transplant (and also, would be surprised if there are a large number of APS teachers who are transplant recipients). For the “CDC high-risk” folks, I understand the concern but, to be fair, having hypertension or a high BMI are not disabilities and if they were, we really should be picketing outside of every grocery store in the land bc I promise you people are working there every day who are also in CDC high-risk categories. But I am concerned if APS is denying WFH to employees going through cancer treatment.

an essential job function of teachers is teaching in person. Prior to the pandemic nobody would have thought differently. The idea that students could be in person and a teacher could be broadcast into the classroom, as a regular way of doing business, is, quite frankly, absurd. Sure- there have been classes taught like this, e.g. when there was not enough enrollment to justify a teacher, and the school uses a distance method for a teacher in another area-- but those are classes that the students opt into, and the benefits are more than the downside.

The ADA simply does not require an employer to redefine the essential functions of the job- it requires an employer to provide accommodations that allow a person with a disability to perform the essential functions of their job. Yes, the ADA would most likely require leave as an accommodation, but not 'teaching remotely.' I'm surprised that any of these requests are being approved. Approving even one puts the school system at risk b/c then the school system has in fact started to lose the principle that teaching in person is an essential function.

You've hit the nail on the head. When teachers applied due to the high risk CDC issues like being a transplant recipient, they did so using the CARES act. They were approved at that point. When the CARES act funding ended on 12/31, they were told (know this first hand), they just had to submit previous doctor note/medical stuff. Then, APS decided it was via the ADA. Well, the ADA doesn't as you say specify telework as an option in their little boxes of what can be done in a workplace. Thus, folks were denied. Some are appealing and now using those ADA forms plus lots of doctor info, but APS was a bit Orwellian when they said, "teachers did receive telework accommodations... until students return" and Kafkaesque when they said what was used for the CARES act was fine, until it wasn't and they used the ADA without telling the teachers to send the ADA forms in. I will honestly use the letter I received to share how both were done LOL with my students, in the future.