| The report shows an increase in kids who are failing but is there mention of kids who are doing better? I'd more likely believe there's a wider chasm before I believe all kids are doing worse. |
That would make too much sense. Instead MCPS keeps trying the same approaches and wondering why it’s not working for students. |
Some people claim kids are getting all-time high scores on MAPs. Others say they were at an all-time low. With so many contradictory reports here, I'm not sure what to think anymore. |
But it has not been a disaster for most kids. More than usual are failing but not most. DP |
It depends on how you define disaster. How is academic/curriculum progression compared to a traditional year? Are they teaching the full curriculum in general? |
Attempts to teach the full curriculum were rejected by DCUM parents who felt it was too much work for their children. |
DP. I see you are happily ignoring the data and press that is pouring out about the disproportionate numbers of disadvantaged kids who have simply disappeared from the education system altogether. Of course, it is true that not even thinking about disadvantaged kids is indeed classic DCUM. |
DCUM parents don't have the power to do anything. But anyway, this just means that even kids who are "thriving" are really just better at navigating a highly compromised learning curriculum. |
Maybe if people would stop shout-posting DISTANCE LEARNING IS A DISASTER FOR LITERALLY EVERYONE! then other people would stop response-posting "It's not a disaster for my kid, actually." |
Poster: My kid is thriving. You: I, an anonymous person on the Internet, know better about your kid than you do, and no, your kid is not. |
What do you mean by "thriving"? Have you been able to compare expected learning outcomes this year versus what a traditional year looks like? Or are they just getting A's and say they're happy? |
Poster: My kid is thriving. You: You, as a parent, are not qualified to assess whether or not your kid is thriving. |
+1 As for whether it's appropriate to call DL a "disaster" or a "district-wide disaster" or "a tragicomic sh!tstorm of epic proportions" even when some students are happy and thriving, DCUM can knock itself out splitting those hairs. However, it is very clear that, taken together, both on average, or as measured by those who are worst-off (some weirdos suggest that the measure of civilization is taken by those at "the bottom," but they are probably communist snowflake trash,) when we account for academic outcomes, and mental health outcomes for the group as a whole: this is un-great. I think that most of us will at least agree that what is so incredibly frustrating about the current moment is that, will all of the system's weaknesses and flaws on full display, there is little hope that we MCPS will manage to do much more than revert to the prior system once all of this is over. Alas. P.S. It's great that some kids are thriving! Individual experiences are important. It's also at the same time to look at the experience of the group, of the community, and to look at it in different ways. I hear a lot of parents talking about "their kids," and all I can ask is: Aren't we responsible for one another more broadly than that? It's such a weird way to organize ourselves, as humans: My offspring, and my offspring only. Obviously all of us -- really everyone here -- cares about the good of the student-body at large, even if only to avoid future systemic problems -- though probably in deeper and more caring ways that just that. |
|
I could definitely see where some kids would thrive in the DL environment. Particularly kids who prefer independent learning or tend to be more introverted.
My 2nd and 4th graders are doing well. Consistent/better Map scores and good grades. I wouldn't say they are thriving though because they both do best with a lot of social interaction. Particularly my 4th grader. I want them back in school for their social-emotional well-being. |
No, classic DCUM is disparaging disadvantaged kids. Or extolling them and disparaging the families of more advantaged kids. Or blaming Jack Smith for all their woes. |