Do you think a national "gap year" would work as a compromise solution?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What? It satisfies no one. There are a million reasons why. Let's start with:

Do you then tell the incoming class of K to just not attend school? If not, then you have a huge swell of kids to teach - who is paying for that?

They stay home and the federal government pays. Obviously.

Actually, this might be the stick that gets the federal government to enact truly universal prek 3-4 everywhere.

What I believe pp meant is that the following year would include all of the kindergarteners who sat out a year plus all of the next year’s kindergarteners. You would have a double sized bubble of kids moving through the school system for the next 13 years.

Obviously

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Who is going to pay these sky high school taxes and then have no schooling? Are you proposing we just lay off all of the school staff for a year? That we pay them and then tell them not to do any teaching?

No. I am proposing a compromise. We do 100% DL this year. Teachers and staff get paid at their same rate. Then, when there is a vaccine widely distributed (hopefully by fall 2021), any kids who want to will reenter the same grade for in person learning.

Yes it will cost a shit ton of money. But this is the next generation we're talking about. It should be our highest priority.

If we can give the airlines and other corporations a trillion dollar bailout, we can do it for schools too.

The next generation is already on the hook to pay back all these bail outs. You do realize that all the trillions being spent on the bail outs is all borrowed.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What? It satisfies no one. There are a million reasons why. Let's start with:

Do you then tell the incoming class of K to just not attend school? If not, then you have a huge swell of kids to teach - who is paying for that?

They stay home and the federal government pays. Obviously.

Actually, this might be the stick that gets the federal government to enact truly universal prek 3-4 everywhere.

What a classic DCUM answer. Just have the government pay. On some level I wish people would recognize that means not paying for something else

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What? It satisfies no one. There are a million reasons why. Let's start with:

Do you then tell the incoming class of K to just not attend school? If not, then you have a huge swell of kids to teach - who is paying for that?

They stay home and the federal government pays. Obviously.

Actually, this might be the stick that gets the federal government to enact truly universal prek 3-4 everywhere.

What I believe pp meant is that the following year would include all of the kindergarteners who sat out a year plus all of the next year’s kindergarteners. You would have a double sized bubble of kids moving through the school system for the next 13 years.

Obviously

So? That's better than the alternative, which is that most kids just lose a year of schooling.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What? It satisfies no one. There are a million reasons why. Let's start with:

Do you then tell the incoming class of K to just not attend school? If not, then you have a huge swell of kids to teach - who is paying for that?

They stay home and the federal government pays. Obviously.

Actually, this might be the stick that gets the federal government to enact truly universal prek 3-4 everywhere.

What a classic DCUM answer. Just have the government pay. On some level I wish people would recognize that means not paying for something else

Sooo corporations, small companies, and the unemployed should get huge (undeserved) bailouts but not kids?

Ok I see where your priorities are.

[Anonymous]

With gap year -some kids (Redshirted in 2019) will start kindergarten at age 7.

[Anonymous]

schools are designed to move a certain number of people through every year- this goes from daycare/preschool through graduate school. If you double the number of students in a single year, it doesn't work

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What? It satisfies no one. There are a million reasons why. Let's start with:

Do you then tell the incoming class of K to just not attend school? If not, then you have a huge swell of kids to teach - who is paying for that?

They stay home and the federal government pays. Obviously.

Actually, this might be the stick that gets the federal government to enact truly universal prek 3-4 everywhere.

What a classic DCUM answer. Just have the government pay. On some level I wish people would recognize that means not paying for something else

+1 - and that WE are going to pay for it, somehow, not "the government".

People are so clueless when it comes to fiscal matters.

[Anonymous]

No.

Test all the kids, school by school.

If Kenny and Kenesha and Pooja and Peter enter kindergarten writing their names, short sentences and reading Frog and Toad books, put them in a separate class from Marcus and Mary and Mei and Matthew who are still learning the alphabet.

Let teachers concentrate on meeting children where they are.

[Anonymous]

Yes, at least it will be fair to everyone.
With government subsidized childcare for those who have to work.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What? It satisfies no one. There are a million reasons why. Let's start with:

Do you then tell the incoming class of K to just not attend school? If not, then you have a huge swell of kids to teach - who is paying for that?

They stay home and the federal government pays. Obviously.

Actually, this might be the stick that gets the federal government to enact truly universal prek 3-4 everywhere.

What I believe pp meant is that the following year would include all of the kindergarteners who sat out a year plus all of the next year’s kindergarteners. You would have a double sized bubble of kids moving through the school system for the next 13 years.

Obviously

So? That's better than the alternative, which is that most kids just lose a year of schooling.

Most kids aren’t losing a year of schooling. If you want to hold your kid back, go ahead. No one is stopping you.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What? It satisfies no one. There are a million reasons why. Let's start with:

Do you then tell the incoming class of K to just not attend school? If not, then you have a huge swell of kids to teach - who is paying for that?

They stay home and the federal government pays. Obviously.

Actually, this might be the stick that gets the federal government to enact truly universal prek 3-4 everywhere.

What a classic DCUM answer. Just have the government pay. On some level I wish people would recognize that means not paying for something else

+1 - and that WE are going to pay for it, somehow, not "the government".

People are so clueless when it comes to fiscal matters.

I thought the government got money just by printing it. Limitless. The mysterious sugar daddy behind the curtain.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:schools are designed to move a certain number of people through every year- this goes from daycare/preschool through graduate school. If you double the number of students in a single year, it doesn't work

This.
OP, when time comes for your child to apply to college, there will be twice as many applicants and you'll be complaining again.
Better to suck it up and try to supplement/remediate the crappy year.
Plus, older kids would not go for it. No self-respecting 8th grader would agree to be stuck in middle school one more year.

[Anonymous]

Today I proposed to my incoming 9th grader to do something like that. He can do 9th grade online (Our district’s online offering is a joke) and work in a bike shop (or wherever) for most of the day. Of course, easier said than done.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Today I proposed to my incoming 9th grader to do something like that. He can do 9th grade online (Our district’s online offering is a joke) and work in a bike shop (or wherever) for most of the day. Of course, easier said than done.

Kids that age aren’t allowed to work most of the day on a school day. At most 3-4 hours, depending on where you live.