Support the Montgomery Virtual Academy (MVA) from Budget Cuts!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:After 68 pages of ping ponging about whether COVID is still a thing or not, I'll weigh in. I'm not even a little bit afraid of COVID or any other contagion right now. Yet I still see value in a virtual option for kids who either can't or don't want to attend school. Is virtual as effective as in person? Of course not. Is it better than no school at all (which is what the data says about 25% or more kids in MCPS). MCPS is willing to waste tens of millions on all kinds of nonsense. Virtual school seems like a good investment that could use some improvement such as a state-run virtual school that all the counties could join, economies of scale and all.

What makes you think that kids who don’t bother attending in-person school would be present for virtual school? The chronic absenteeism rates for the MVA were higher than in-person and the graduation rates for NCS were lower.

It's easier to attend school from home (or wherever) than it is to go in person. Remove barriers and we'll serve more kids. It's that simple. We can never serve everyone and we have to acknowledge that. And because we don't need $200 million for a school for these kids virtual school should save $ once some of the issues are ironed out.

DP. Except the evidence is that this is wrong. MVA has worse issues with attendance than in person school and the issues with chronic absenteeism exploded after virtual instruction was required and have gotten better now that in person is returning to being the norm. During the pandemic Connecticut collected data on this and chronic absenteeism was worse for students with more remote learning. The bolded has a certain logic to it, but I'm the real world that's not how it plays out.

This is comparing apples and oranges. Kids in virtual are already outliers. So of course they'll have more issues. And I'm not sure we should care. We have in person which serves 95% of kids. Virtual could serve another 4%. And we can leave the other 1% who doesn't care behind instead of spending 80% of our resources on those kids.

MVA wasn't serving 4%. It was serving closer to 0.5%, which is well below your proposed threshold for abandonment.

Those were my numbers and I was just using them as an example. If MVA was improved and promoted it very well might be 4 or even 8 percent. The point is that it doesn't require a building or transportation so it should be a lot cheaper. Why throw that away when it could be a good option for some kids.

But when looking at system-wide costs, it is not cheaper to continue MVA because it is ultimately duplicating services provided in MCPS schools. MVA isn't cheaper unless you save money elsewhere by closing schools.

Admittedly, that is what some the MVA advocates want to do. They've been proposing to close schools in poor areas of the county in order to fund MVA. Very few people in the county would consider that reasonable.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:After 68 pages of ping ponging about whether COVID is still a thing or not, I'll weigh in. I'm not even a little bit afraid of COVID or any other contagion right now. Yet I still see value in a virtual option for kids who either can't or don't want to attend school. Is virtual as effective as in person? Of course not. Is it better than no school at all (which is what the data says about 25% or more kids in MCPS). MCPS is willing to waste tens of millions on all kinds of nonsense. Virtual school seems like a good investment that could use some improvement such as a state-run virtual school that all the counties could join, economies of scale and all.

What makes you think that kids who don’t bother attending in-person school would be present for virtual school? The chronic absenteeism rates for the MVA were higher than in-person and the graduation rates for NCS were lower.

It's easier to attend school from home (or wherever) than it is to go in person. Remove barriers and we'll serve more kids. It's that simple. We can never serve everyone and we have to acknowledge that. And because we don't need $200 million for a school for these kids virtual school should save $ once some of the issues are ironed out.

DP. Except the evidence is that this is wrong. MVA has worse issues with attendance than in person school and the issues with chronic absenteeism exploded after virtual instruction was required and have gotten better now that in person is returning to being the norm. During the pandemic Connecticut collected data on this and chronic absenteeism was worse for students with more remote learning. The bolded has a certain logic to it, but I'm the real world that's not how it plays out.

This is comparing apples and oranges. Kids in virtual are already outliers. So of course they'll have more issues. And I'm not sure we should care. We have in person which serves 95% of kids. Virtual could serve another 4%. And we can leave the other 1% who doesn't care behind instead of spending 80% of our resources on those kids.

MVA wasn't serving 4%. It was serving closer to 0.5%, which is well below your proposed threshold for abandonment.

Those were my numbers and I was just using them as an example. If MVA was improved and promoted it very well might be 4 or even 8 percent. The point is that it doesn't require a building or transportation so it should be a lot cheaper. Why throw that away when it could be a good option for some kids.

But when looking at system-wide costs, it is not cheaper to continue MVA because it is ultimately duplicating services provided in MCPS schools. MVA isn't cheaper unless you save money elsewhere by closing schools.

Admittedly, that is what some the MVA advocates want to do. They've been proposing to close schools in poor areas of the county in order to fund MVA. Very few people in the county would consider that reasonable.

I don't think anyone is advocating for closing brick-n-mortar schools. Just provide a virtual option. The only reason it costs so much is because the county can't seem to allow the funding for a student to follow that student. It is like they are paying twice for the same student. Money goes to the home school and then they need additional money for the MVA. That makes no sense. Oh, except to Brian Hull.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:After 68 pages of ping ponging about whether COVID is still a thing or not, I'll weigh in. I'm not even a little bit afraid of COVID or any other contagion right now. Yet I still see value in a virtual option for kids who either can't or don't want to attend school. Is virtual as effective as in person? Of course not. Is it better than no school at all (which is what the data says about 25% or more kids in MCPS). MCPS is willing to waste tens of millions on all kinds of nonsense. Virtual school seems like a good investment that could use some improvement such as a state-run virtual school that all the counties could join, economies of scale and all.

What makes you think that kids who don’t bother attending in-person school would be present for virtual school? The chronic absenteeism rates for the MVA were higher than in-person and the graduation rates for NCS were lower.

It's easier to attend school from home (or wherever) than it is to go in person. Remove barriers and we'll serve more kids. It's that simple. We can never serve everyone and we have to acknowledge that. And because we don't need $200 million for a school for these kids virtual school should save $ once some of the issues are ironed out.

DP. Except the evidence is that this is wrong. MVA has worse issues with attendance than in person school and the issues with chronic absenteeism exploded after virtual instruction was required and have gotten better now that in person is returning to being the norm. During the pandemic Connecticut collected data on this and chronic absenteeism was worse for students with more remote learning. The bolded has a certain logic to it, but I'm the real world that's not how it plays out.

This is comparing apples and oranges. Kids in virtual are already outliers. So of course they'll have more issues. And I'm not sure we should care. We have in person which serves 95% of kids. Virtual could serve another 4%. And we can leave the other 1% who doesn't care behind instead of spending 80% of our resources on those kids.

MVA wasn't serving 4%. It was serving closer to 0.5%, which is well below your proposed threshold for abandonment.

Those were my numbers and I was just using them as an example. If MVA was improved and promoted it very well might be 4 or even 8 percent. The point is that it doesn't require a building or transportation so it should be a lot cheaper. Why throw that away when it could be a good option for some kids.

But when looking at system-wide costs, it is not cheaper to continue MVA because it is ultimately duplicating services provided in MCPS schools. MVA isn't cheaper unless you save money elsewhere by closing schools.

Admittedly, that is what some the MVA advocates want to do. They've been proposing to close schools in poor areas of the county in order to fund MVA. Very few people in the county would consider that reasonable.

It is not duplicating services. Your post makes no sense. There is no equal program.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I just love that the person who says “significant school choice” is the “only” thing that’ll salvage American education is hellbent on denying others that same choice. The cognitive dissonance is astounding but not surprising.

I'm not the school choice poster, but I'll note that the MVA supporters aren't any better. They now like to talk about how important it is to offer the choice of virtual because not all kids can learn in the same environment, but they still won't acknowledge it was wrong to deny kids a similar choice for 18 months until the fall of 2021.

The reality is everyone is watching out for themselves and their kids. If you want to send your kids to MVA, or you want to teach in MVA, then that means coming up with arguments to support it, regardless of any logical inconsistencies with previous positions expressed. If you send your kids to MCPS schools, then that means advocating for maximizing the resources available to those schools by keeping MVA closed.

Actually most MVA parents fully acknowledge that virtual didn’t work for everyone. It’s in person parents who won’t acknowledge virtual works for others without trying to say they are bad parents, want kids to go on vacations, shield their eyes from school clothing (the most bizarre argument yet), etc.

I've never heard a single MVA supporter acknowledge that kids should have had the opportunity to go to school in fall 2020. Some even point to MVA as an example for the rest of MCPS to follow.

Because we are good people who agreed kids should be virtual due to the pandemic, health care was overloaded and the high transmission rate. Why cannot you acknowledge how serious covid was at that time?

Not by the fall.

You forgot about omnicron.

Partly given the misspelling, I can't tell if that was a joke. Assuming you were serious, Omicron wasn't until after MCPS reopened, and MCPS remained open. We certainly could have reopened in fall 2020.

We could have reopened in fall 2020, and we should have (in my opinion), but I think it's relevant that omicron was after the vaccines, while fall 2020 was before the vaccines.

Your opinion is wrong. Sorry you lost your free child care. This has nothing to do with the mva so move on.

Sorry you lost your free private school experience. Time to pay up or send your kids to public school.

Grow up. The MVA is public school.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:After 68 pages of ping ponging about whether COVID is still a thing or not, I'll weigh in. I'm not even a little bit afraid of COVID or any other contagion right now. Yet I still see value in a virtual option for kids who either can't or don't want to attend school. Is virtual as effective as in person? Of course not. Is it better than no school at all (which is what the data says about 25% or more kids in MCPS). MCPS is willing to waste tens of millions on all kinds of nonsense. Virtual school seems like a good investment that could use some improvement such as a state-run virtual school that all the counties could join, economies of scale and all.

What makes you think that kids who don’t bother attending in-person school would be present for virtual school? The chronic absenteeism rates for the MVA were higher than in-person and the graduation rates for NCS were lower.

It's easier to attend school from home (or wherever) than it is to go in person. Remove barriers and we'll serve more kids. It's that simple. We can never serve everyone and we have to acknowledge that. And because we don't need $200 million for a school for these kids virtual school should save $ once some of the issues are ironed out.

DP. Except the evidence is that this is wrong. MVA has worse issues with attendance than in person school and the issues with chronic absenteeism exploded after virtual instruction was required and have gotten better now that in person is returning to being the norm. During the pandemic Connecticut collected data on this and chronic absenteeism was worse for students with more remote learning. The bolded has a certain logic to it, but I'm the real world that's not how it plays out.

This is comparing apples and oranges. Kids in virtual are already outliers. So of course they'll have more issues. And I'm not sure we should care. We have in person which serves 95% of kids. Virtual could serve another 4%. And we can leave the other 1% who doesn't care behind instead of spending 80% of our resources on those kids.

MVA wasn't serving 4%. It was serving closer to 0.5%, which is well below your proposed threshold for abandonment.

Those were my numbers and I was just using them as an example. If MVA was improved and promoted it very well might be 4 or even 8 percent. The point is that it doesn't require a building or transportation so it should be a lot cheaper. Why throw that away when it could be a good option for some kids.

No, it wouldn't. Enrollment was dropping rapidly. The MVA supporters claim this was just due to MCPS restricting enrollees, but some elementary grades had fewer than 40 kids spread across 3 teachers! No wonder those were so motivated to keep it going. A lot of the posters here are probably teachers pretending to be parents.

They were not letting kids off the waitlist.

Not exactly the sort of educational outcomes you hope to see with class sizes of 12 kids per teacher.

Where is the current data?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Look at the enrollment numbers by grade and the number of teachers listed by grade on the MVA staff directory.

Just did. Nothing shows a decline in enrollment.

lol the program lost over 40% of its enrollees year over year two years in a row, and enrollment was down more than 67% overall.

This was expected when sone families were waiting for Covid to get less serious and they refused new students entry.

[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:I just love that the person who says “significant school choice” is the “only” thing that’ll salvage American education is hellbent on denying others that same choice. The cognitive dissonance is astounding but not surprising.

I'm not the school choice poster, but I'll note that the MVA supporters aren't any better. They now like to talk about how important it is to offer the choice of virtual because not all kids can learn in the same environment, but they still won't acknowledge it was wrong to deny kids a similar choice for 18 months until the fall of 2021.

The reality is everyone is watching out for themselves and their kids. If you want to send your kids to MVA, or you want to teach in MVA, then that means coming up with arguments to support it, regardless of any logical inconsistencies with previous positions expressed. If you send your kids to MCPS schools, then that means advocating for maximizing the resources available to those schools by keeping MVA closed.

Actually most MVA parents fully acknowledge that virtual didn’t work for everyone. It’s in person parents who won’t acknowledge virtual works for others without trying to say they are bad parents, want kids to go on vacations, shield their eyes from school clothing (the most bizarre argument yet), etc.

I've never heard a single MVA supporter acknowledge that kids should have had the opportunity to go to school in fall 2020. Some even point to MVA as an example for the rest of MCPS to follow.

Because we are good people who agreed kids should be virtual due to the pandemic, health care was overloaded and the high transmission rate. Why cannot you acknowledge how serious covid was at that time?

Not by the fall.

You forgot about omnicron.

Partly given the misspelling, I can't tell if that was a joke. Assuming you were serious, Omicron wasn't until after MCPS reopened, and MCPS remained open. We certainly could have reopened in fall 2020.

We could have reopened in fall 2020, and we should have (in my opinion), but I think it's relevant that omicron was after the vaccines, while fall 2020 was before the vaccines.

Your opinion is wrong. Sorry you lost your free child care. This has nothing to do with the mva so move on.

Sorry you lost your free private school experience. Time to pay up or send your kids to public school.

Grow up. The MVA is public school.

No MVA is MVA and public school is public school.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:After 68 pages of ping ponging about whether COVID is still a thing or not, I'll weigh in. I'm not even a little bit afraid of COVID or any other contagion right now. Yet I still see value in a virtual option for kids who either can't or don't want to attend school. Is virtual as effective as in person? Of course not. Is it better than no school at all (which is what the data says about 25% or more kids in MCPS). MCPS is willing to waste tens of millions on all kinds of nonsense. Virtual school seems like a good investment that could use some improvement such as a state-run virtual school that all the counties could join, economies of scale and all.

What makes you think that kids who don’t bother attending in-person school would be present for virtual school? The chronic absenteeism rates for the MVA were higher than in-person and the graduation rates for NCS were lower.

It's easier to attend school from home (or wherever) than it is to go in person. Remove barriers and we'll serve more kids. It's that simple. We can never serve everyone and we have to acknowledge that. And because we don't need $200 million for a school for these kids virtual school should save $ once some of the issues are ironed out.

DP. Except the evidence is that this is wrong. MVA has worse issues with attendance than in person school and the issues with chronic absenteeism exploded after virtual instruction was required and have gotten better now that in person is returning to being the norm. During the pandemic Connecticut collected data on this and chronic absenteeism was worse for students with more remote learning. The bolded has a certain logic to it, but I'm the real world that's not how it plays out.

This is comparing apples and oranges. Kids in virtual are already outliers. So of course they'll have more issues. And I'm not sure we should care. We have in person which serves 95% of kids. Virtual could serve another 4%. And we can leave the other 1% who doesn't care behind instead of spending 80% of our resources on those kids.

MVA wasn't serving 4%. It was serving closer to 0.5%, which is well below your proposed threshold for abandonment.

Those were my numbers and I was just using them as an example. If MVA was improved and promoted it very well might be 4 or even 8 percent. The point is that it doesn't require a building or transportation so it should be a lot cheaper. Why throw that away when it could be a good option for some kids.

No, it wouldn't. Enrollment was dropping rapidly. The MVA supporters claim this was just due to MCPS restricting enrollees, but some elementary grades had fewer than 40 kids spread across 3 teachers! No wonder those were so motivated to keep it going. A lot of the posters here are probably teachers pretending to be parents.

They were not letting kids off the waitlist.

Not exactly the sort of educational outcomes you hope to see with class sizes of 12 kids per teacher.

Where is the current data?

Time is running out to find it so we can show the miraculous one-year turnaround in poor student achievement in math and reading, even poorer achievement among young and poor students, increased chronic absenteeism and declining graduation rates that the 2022 data reflected. Any ideas where to find it?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Look at the enrollment numbers by grade and the number of teachers listed by grade on the MVA staff directory.

Just did. Nothing shows a decline in enrollment.

lol the program lost over 40% of its enrollees year over year two years in a row, and enrollment was down more than 67% overall.

This was expected when sone families were waiting for Covid to get less serious and they refused new students entry.

My bad. I forgot reading about the expectations when it started that the program would shrink by two-thirds once those who tried it left in droves because of how poorly it educated kids, er, I mean once all those families got more comfy with Covid risks and returned to in person school en masse.

[Anonymous]

Why do so many people hate on the Virtual Academy? Or is it just a couple cranks who can't let go? So weird.

[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:

Anonymous wrote:I just love that the person who says “significant school choice” is the “only” thing that’ll salvage American education is hellbent on denying others that same choice. The cognitive dissonance is astounding but not surprising.

I'm not the school choice poster, but I'll note that the MVA supporters aren't any better. They now like to talk about how important it is to offer the choice of virtual because not all kids can learn in the same environment, but they still won't acknowledge it was wrong to deny kids a similar choice for 18 months until the fall of 2021.

The reality is everyone is watching out for themselves and their kids. If you want to send your kids to MVA, or you want to teach in MVA, then that means coming up with arguments to support it, regardless of any logical inconsistencies with previous positions expressed. If you send your kids to MCPS schools, then that means advocating for maximizing the resources available to those schools by keeping MVA closed.

Actually most MVA parents fully acknowledge that virtual didn’t work for everyone. It’s in person parents who won’t acknowledge virtual works for others without trying to say they are bad parents, want kids to go on vacations, shield their eyes from school clothing (the most bizarre argument yet), etc.

I've never heard a single MVA supporter acknowledge that kids should have had the opportunity to go to school in fall 2020. Some even point to MVA as an example for the rest of MCPS to follow.

Because we are good people who agreed kids should be virtual due to the pandemic, health care was overloaded and the high transmission rate. Why cannot you acknowledge how serious covid was at that time?

Not by the fall.

You forgot about omnicron.

Partly given the misspelling, I can't tell if that was a joke. Assuming you were serious, Omicron wasn't until after MCPS reopened, and MCPS remained open. We certainly could have reopened in fall 2020.

We could have reopened in fall 2020, and we should have (in my opinion), but I think it's relevant that omicron was after the vaccines, while fall 2020 was before the vaccines.

Your opinion is wrong. Sorry you lost your free child care. This has nothing to do with the mva so move on.

Sorry you lost your free private school experience. Time to pay up or send your kids to public school.

Grow up. The MVA is public school.

No MVA is MVA and public school is public school.

What's the Charter School going to be?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:After 68 pages of ping ponging about whether COVID is still a thing or not, I'll weigh in. I'm not even a little bit afraid of COVID or any other contagion right now. Yet I still see value in a virtual option for kids who either can't or don't want to attend school. Is virtual as effective as in person? Of course not. Is it better than no school at all (which is what the data says about 25% or more kids in MCPS). MCPS is willing to waste tens of millions on all kinds of nonsense. Virtual school seems like a good investment that could use some improvement such as a state-run virtual school that all the counties could join, economies of scale and all.

What makes you think that kids who don’t bother attending in-person school would be present for virtual school? The chronic absenteeism rates for the MVA were higher than in-person and the graduation rates for NCS were lower.

It's easier to attend school from home (or wherever) than it is to go in person. Remove barriers and we'll serve more kids. It's that simple. We can never serve everyone and we have to acknowledge that. And because we don't need $200 million for a school for these kids virtual school should save $ once some of the issues are ironed out.

DP. Except the evidence is that this is wrong. MVA has worse issues with attendance than in person school and the issues with chronic absenteeism exploded after virtual instruction was required and have gotten better now that in person is returning to being the norm. During the pandemic Connecticut collected data on this and chronic absenteeism was worse for students with more remote learning. The bolded has a certain logic to it, but I'm the real world that's not how it plays out.

This is comparing apples and oranges. Kids in virtual are already outliers. So of course they'll have more issues. And I'm not sure we should care. We have in person which serves 95% of kids. Virtual could serve another 4%. And we can leave the other 1% who doesn't care behind instead of spending 80% of our resources on those kids.

MVA wasn't serving 4%. It was serving closer to 0.5%, which is well below your proposed threshold for abandonment.

Those were my numbers and I was just using them as an example. If MVA was improved and promoted it very well might be 4 or even 8 percent. The point is that it doesn't require a building or transportation so it should be a lot cheaper. Why throw that away when it could be a good option for some kids.

But when looking at system-wide costs, it is not cheaper to continue MVA because it is ultimately duplicating services provided in MCPS schools. MVA isn't cheaper unless you save money elsewhere by closing schools.

Admittedly, that is what some the MVA advocates want to do. They've been proposing to close schools in poor areas of the county in order to fund MVA. Very few people in the county would consider that reasonable.

I don't think anyone is advocating for closing brick-n-mortar schools. Just provide a virtual option. The only reason it costs so much is because the county can't seem to allow the funding for a student to follow that student. It is like they are paying twice for the same student. Money goes to the home school and then they need additional money for the MVA. That makes no sense. Oh, except to Brian Hull.

Except for this person:

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:After 68 pages of ping ponging about whether COVID is still a thing or not, I'll weigh in. I'm not even a little bit afraid of COVID or any other contagion right now. Yet I still see value in a virtual option for kids who either can't or don't want to attend school. Is virtual as effective as in person? Of course not. Is it better than no school at all (which is what the data says about 25% or more kids in MCPS). MCPS is willing to waste tens of millions on all kinds of nonsense. Virtual school seems like a good investment that could use some improvement such as a state-run virtual school that all the counties could join, economies of scale and all.

What makes you think that kids who don’t bother attending in-person school would be present for virtual school? The chronic absenteeism rates for the MVA were higher than in-person and the graduation rates for NCS were lower.

It's easier to attend school from home (or wherever) than it is to go in person. Remove barriers and we'll serve more kids. It's that simple. We can never serve everyone and we have to acknowledge that. And because we don't need $200 million for a school for these kids virtual school should save $ once some of the issues are ironed out.

DP. Except the evidence is that this is wrong. MVA has worse issues with attendance than in person school and the issues with chronic absenteeism exploded after virtual instruction was required and have gotten better now that in person is returning to being the norm. During the pandemic Connecticut collected data on this and chronic absenteeism was worse for students with more remote learning. The bolded has a certain logic to it, but I'm the real world that's not how it plays out.

This is comparing apples and oranges. Kids in virtual are already outliers. So of course they'll have more issues. And I'm not sure we should care. We have in person which serves 95% of kids. Virtual could serve another 4%. And we can leave the other 1% who doesn't care behind instead of spending 80% of our resources on those kids.

MVA wasn't serving 4%. It was serving closer to 0.5%, which is well below your proposed threshold for abandonment.

Those were my numbers and I was just using them as an example. If MVA was improved and promoted it very well might be 4 or even 8 percent. The point is that it doesn't require a building or transportation so it should be a lot cheaper. Why throw that away when it could be a good option for some kids.

But when looking at system-wide costs, it is not cheaper to continue MVA because it is ultimately duplicating services provided in MCPS schools. MVA isn't cheaper unless you save money elsewhere by closing schools.

Admittedly, that is what some the MVA advocates want to do. They've been proposing to close schools in poor areas of the county in order to fund MVA. Very few people in the county would consider that reasonable.

It is not duplicating services. Your post makes no sense. There is no equal program.

It is. MVA teaches children. Schools were doing that before MVA, and will continue to do that after MVA.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Why do so many people hate on the Virtual Academy? Or is it just a couple cranks who can't let go? So weird.

They don't want funding at their kids' schools to be cut in order to fund MVA.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why do so many people hate on the Virtual Academy? Or is it just a couple cranks who can't let go? So weird.

They don't want funding at their kids' schools to be cut in order to fund MVA.

Nope just cut all the useless central office employees who do nothing to actually help students. Or stop hiring incompetent superintendents who get golden parachutes for covering up sexual harassment.