Individual School Plans?

[Anonymous]

Someone just started a now deleted thread that MCPS has delayed in person until March. Will this impact dcps?

[Anonymous]

I also think it's hard to put the blame on individual schools and their plans, when really DCPS should have thought more about the additional staffing resources required. You can't teach the same # of kids with the same # of teachers in smaller cohorts of < 12 kids per group unless you bring in more staff OR move to a model where 1/2 the kids are at home with no interaction with teachers on the other days. And for that model you need to start out that way at the beginning of the year to avoid huge disruption mid-year. Many districts that have allowed virtual and in-person schooling, for example, hired additional teachers to teach the virtual classes, outside the normal classroom teachers.

[Anonymous]

Try to find replacements??? THERE ARE NO REPLACEMENTS. That’s why Hearst is stuck. Do you want the school to have 4 teachers available total? For the entire school?? That’s the solution?



DCPS actively campaigned for weeks maybe even months to get new hires and subs for CARES or live instruction. They got none. That’s why they went to plan B of pulling staff from

Curious how many complainers in this thread actually gave a kid who is top 10 neediest of their grade level. Even if Hearst adopted the god almighty Lafayette plan... I bet most of y’all’s kids wouldn’t even be in a spot. In fact they’d be worse off because they’d be shuffled into a room with 35-40 kids not even the whole class visible on the screen at once and barely getting noticed. Potentially with a teacher who has never taught that subject or grade level before. The high level of quality you expect at Hearst comes from many years of experience. You won’t be getting individual attention and neither will your kid and the teacher will be literally building the plane as they fly it with the content.

If you’re ok with having an unskilled sub or a teacher in a brand new subject area... well then, you’re looking for childcare, my friends. And I’m sure curious if most of y’all complaining on this thread already have childcare or could afford it.

Vaccines are weeks away for educators. I’ve heard NOTHING about Hearst teachers or any DCPS teachers refusing to vaccinate. You’ve waited 10 months. Let’s see what happens in 1 more.


I wish the moderator would close this thread because this level of tacky for Hearst is embarrassing.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Someone just started a now deleted thread that MCPS has delayed in person until March. Will this impact dcps?

Not sure why it was deleted but seems like MCPS looked at Covid numbers and decided to hold off. DCPS, in my opinion, is not managed as well as MCPS even though MCPS is at least 5 times larger. The DCPS Chancellor wants to keep the mayor happy. Not sure he cares about much else.

[Anonymous]

Our school’s plan gets back about 1/3 of students in most grades. Lucky for you if you are IEP or ELL. But if you are miserable and desperate — but no priority — like we are, you’re screwed. I can’t believe my kids are missing an entire 1 1/2 of their elementary school experience sitting at home hating school.

I understand all the issues, but I’m in tears. I don’t know how we’ll survive this as a family. We have so much yelling every day.

[Anonymous]

Are there any other folks at DCPS (elementary) schools that haven’t heard anything from their school yet?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

This principal just 100% prioritized teachers over parents. If s/he has capital to burn with parents (long track record of happy parents at the school), it’s the easier approach since s/he has to see the teachers every day. If s/he doesn’t have that capital, this will get her/him run out of the school. Frankly, parents at my school would revolt.

THIS

The principal is protecting the people that really matter: the teachers. Good on them. The teachers make the school. The last time I checked, my kid has 20 classmates, but only one teacher. The teacher makes the class and does the teaching. If the teacher gets COVID-19, sick, and heaven forbid dies, then that will be a tragedy that could have been prevented. Be glad you have at least a virtual teacher. Under the DCPS plan, eventually a teacher will get infected. I hope not, but with this DCPS plan, it will be inevitable.

I think part of the problem is setting the bar at ‘one teacher will get infected.’ The teachers going back don’t qualify for ADA and therefore I assume they are healthy enough to be going back to work. Getting infected is not the end of the world. Many DCPS teachers may have been infected going about their daily business. Of course everyone wants to be safe but this level of fear is unhealthy.

Unless you pass it along to a vulnerable family member, of course. I’m living this right now - husband’s uncle for infected by his son who is a high school teacher where the schools have been open since September. The son got a mild case; the dad is on a ventilator and not expected to survive.

I am sorry and hope he is able to recover. This is why the CARES act allows people who live with vulnerable family members to take time. Again though most people who get COVID are fine. Young, healthy teachers should be able to return in person.

That’s the problem more than half the staff at my school are not young and healthy.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Are there any other folks at DCPS (elementary) schools that haven’t heard anything from their school yet?

I'm from a DCPS elementary school that (while I like it generally), has not been great about communicating. I got an email that my kid was selected for a Term 3 classroom, but most parents and the PTA have gotten no information. I hope this is just because the school is working to get the plan right before sending out an email, and I hope a documented plan is coming soon. Really, all that matters is that the plan works, of course. But I can tell the school is loosing credit with parents by their lack of transparency, and we can't afford that.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Try to find replacements??? THERE ARE NO REPLACEMENTS. That’s why Hearst is stuck. Do you want the school to have 4 teachers available total? For the entire school?? That’s the solution?

DCPS actively campaigned for weeks maybe even months to get new hires and subs for CARES or live instruction. They got none. That’s why they went to plan B of pulling staff from

Curious how many complainers in this thread actually gave a kid who is top 10 neediest of their grade level. Even if Hearst adopted the god almighty Lafayette plan... I bet most of y’all’s kids wouldn’t even be in a spot. In fact they’d be worse off because they’d be shuffled into a room with 35-40 kids not even the whole class visible on the screen at once and barely getting noticed. Potentially with a teacher who has never taught that subject or grade level before. The high level of quality you expect at Hearst comes from many years of experience. You won’t be getting individual attention and neither will your kid and the teacher will be literally building the plane as they fly it with the content.

If you’re ok with having an unskilled sub or a teacher in a brand new subject area... well then, you’re looking for childcare, my friends. And I’m sure curious if most of y’all complaining on this thread already have childcare or could afford it.

Vaccines are weeks away for educators. I’ve heard NOTHING about Hearst teachers or any DCPS teachers refusing to vaccinate. You’ve waited 10 months. Let’s see what happens in 1 more.


I wish the moderator would close this thread because this level of tacky for Hearst is embarrassing.

Or just maybe we have hearts and aren't completely selfish assholes. My child is doing fine with DL and we will adapt to a new teacher as we have done LITERALLY EVERY YEAR BC THAT IS HOW SCHOOLS WORK. And I want the kids who need it most to have in person.

Stop being drama queens, pretending that children never have new teachers.

[Anonymous]

we got a spot at Bruce Monroe. totally unexpected but happy. its four days a week, all day. 6 kids per class.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Our school’s plan gets back about 1/3 of students in most grades. Lucky for you if you are IEP or ELL. But if you are miserable and desperate — but no priority — like we are, you’re screwed. I can’t believe my kids are missing an entire 1 1/2 of their elementary school experience sitting at home hating school.

I understand all the issues, but I’m in tears. I don’t know how we’ll survive this as a family. We have so much yelling every day.

Well, if it makes you feel better, those of your children's classmates who were doing well with virtual and declined hybrid seats are going to be just as miserable as your kids in term 3 when they lose their homeroom teacher, their 1-subject teachers, double their vietual class size, and suffer who knows what other disruptions and deteriorations of what had been built so far.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Try to find replacements??? THERE ARE NO REPLACEMENTS. That’s why Hearst is stuck. Do you want the school to have 4 teachers available total? For the entire school?? That’s the solution?

DCPS actively campaigned for weeks maybe even months to get new hires and subs for CARES or live instruction. They got none. That’s why they went to plan B of pulling staff from

Curious how many complainers in this thread actually gave a kid who is top 10 neediest of their grade level. Even if Hearst adopted the god almighty Lafayette plan... I bet most of y’all’s kids wouldn’t even be in a spot. In fact they’d be worse off because they’d be shuffled into a room with 35-40 kids not even the whole class visible on the screen at once and barely getting noticed. Potentially with a teacher who has never taught that subject or grade level before. The high level of quality you expect at Hearst comes from many years of experience. You won’t be getting individual attention and neither will your kid and the teacher will be literally building the plane as they fly it with the content.

If you’re ok with having an unskilled sub or a teacher in a brand new subject area... well then, you’re looking for childcare, my friends. And I’m sure curious if most of y’all complaining on this thread already have childcare or could afford it.

Vaccines are weeks away for educators. I’ve heard NOTHING about Hearst teachers or any DCPS teachers refusing to vaccinate. You’ve waited 10 months. Let’s see what happens in 1 more.


I wish the moderator would close this thread because this level of tacky for Hearst is embarrassing.

Or just maybe we have hearts and aren't completely selfish assholes. My child is doing fine with DL and we will adapt to a new teacher as we have done LITERALLY EVERY YEAR BC THAT IS HOW SCHOOLS WORK. And I want the kids who need it most to have in person.

Stop being drama queens, pretending that children never have new teachers.


This is not true. They DID hire folks for cares rooms. I was on a zoom call for training with 80+ new hires. Many of them openly shared that they are using this as an 'in' for full time work in DCPS. I will also add that of the 80+ new hires nearly 40 of them did not have assigned schools yet. If there is so much need (and there is) why can't DC even distribute folks it has already hired.

[Anonymous]

Friends, there are two different issues going on that you guys keep conflating.

1. Do you absolutely need a place for your kid to be so you can keep your job?
2. How do we bring teachers back?

They are not the same. I am a 'back' teacher and desperate for childcare. I would absolutely stick my kid in a cares room if one were made available.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Did any of you Hearst complainers actually attend the grade-level meetings that solicited feedback from parents about reopening? Most parents said they did not want class size to dramatically increase or to change teachers or to get rid of departmentalization at the upper grades -- all of which would be necessary to open in-person classes in all grades. K is different because there are 3 teachers, so the other two classes can absorb the extra kids without making class sizes huge. Until all teachers and all kids are required to go back, I think this is where we're stuck because we have only 2 teachers per grade in most grade levels. The only other option is hybrid, where teachers teach live and online at the same time, and most parents said they thought that would not work well for anyone. Hearst has no good options, and this plan seems like it was the least disruptive to most people, while still allowing the neediest kids to get some in-person instruction in ELL and SPED. Most people I know are fairly happy with the virtual learning at Hearst because the cohorts are small and our teachers have been awesome. Obviously some kids are not doing well, but the school has to do what works for the majority of kids, and making virtual classes huge does not work for the majority of kids.

This. I recognized that something has to give -- either my kid loses her teacher, or her virtual class is huge, or she loses specialized ELA/math instruction, or they continue all-virtual. You can't have everything, because space and staffing are limited. And a lot of parents want everything. You have to decide what the priority is. For us, it was keeping our kid's homeroom teacher, which we acknowledge might mean that she doesn't get an in-person slot. Someone else might decide on a different tradeoff. But demanding no tradeoffs is unreasonable. And if that's the feedback that Hearst got from parents, then their decision is actually pretty reasonable.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Did any of you Hearst complainers actually attend the grade-level meetings that solicited feedback from parents about reopening? Most parents said they did not want class size to dramatically increase or to change teachers or to get rid of departmentalization at the upper grades -- all of which would be necessary to open in-person classes in all grades. K is different because there are 3 teachers, so the other two classes can absorb the extra kids without making class sizes huge. Until all teachers and all kids are required to go back, I think this is where we're stuck because we have only 2 teachers per grade in most grade levels. The only other option is hybrid, where teachers teach live and online at the same time, and most parents said they thought that would not work well for anyone. Hearst has no good options, and this plan seems like it was the least disruptive to most people, while still allowing the neediest kids to get some in-person instruction in ELL and SPED. Most people I know are fairly happy with the virtual learning at Hearst because the cohorts are small and our teachers have been awesome. Obviously some kids are not doing well, but the school has to do what works for the majority of kids, and making virtual classes huge does not work for the majority of kids.

This. I recognized that something has to give -- either my kid loses her teacher, or her virtual class is huge, or she loses specialized ELA/math instruction, or they continue all-virtual. You can't have everything, because space and staffing are limited. And a lot of parents want everything. You have to decide what the priority is. For us, it was keeping our kid's homeroom teacher, which we acknowledge might mean that she doesn't get an in-person slot. Someone else might decide on a different tradeoff. But demanding no tradeoffs is unreasonable. And if that's the feedback that Hearst got from parents, then their decision is actually pretty reasonable.

I agree with you. I recognized that too and voted for my child to go back and indicated that keeping their teacher wasn't important. However, a lot of parents I know seem to have think they were voting to open schools AND keep their child's teacher, like they were outsmarting DCPS by telling them they wanted it all and calling their bluff by saying they wouldn't come in person if they had to switch teachers. In the end, they're taking the in-person seats with different teachers and/or CARE classroom seats regardless of whether they indicated that they wouldn't take them if their child had to switch teachers. I knew it would end up like this, and I feel bad for the people who honestly indicated that they would take the seat no matter what and now might not be offered one. In-person demand has been undercounted because some parents (in some cases willfully) misinterpreted the survey.