Tell me again why we aren’t opening elementary schools in at least a hybrid format?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:But who says that hybrid means a teacher needs to teach a virtual and in-person simultaneously? Why are you assuming that's the case? Because it's convenient for your case?

Because that's how it's laid out. What would you have the kids do the other 2 days a week ?

asynchronous work. it’s not that hard to figure out!

It amounts to part time school. And complete full time child minding for the smaller kids.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Sigh....

We can make schools better and safer but that won't change the health conditions of people.

The government isn't going to suddenly ban fast food and force people to move more. If we are being honest most disease is from poor eating and lack of movement. Obesity is also a factor in being more susceptible.

If you actually look at trends in places re-opening you'll notice their obesity rates are much lower as well as their rates of people with comorbidities.

So, it's easier to just say teachers are babies than really examine why we could possible be in this situation. Germany's obesity rate is about 22% Average being 26 (which isn't obese by US standards) The average for DC is 50% YES, you read correctly FIFTY PERCENT. AND in ward 7 and 8 is 75%!!!

This is not a joke.
https://dchealth.dc.gov/service/obesity-overview
https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world...ctbook/rankorder/2228rank.html (older but I wanted to use a gov agency)

so no school until we fix the obesity epidemic. way to move the goalposts allll the way into another dimension!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:But who says that hybrid means a teacher needs to teach a virtual and in-person simultaneously? Why are you assuming that's the case? Because it's convenient for your case?

Because that's how it's laid out. What would you have the kids do the other 2 days a week ?

Because anything else would just be part-time school. There is no way to have twice as many teachers and that is what you would need. I could get by with 3 days a week completely asynchronous, but on a policy level I don't think it's very good.

I mean, that might work for a 5th grader, but a 6 year old isn't going to learn with 3 days or asychronous. Basically the teacher has to teach both groups at the same time or it's part time school.

part time in person school is likely better than what we have now.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:But who says that hybrid means a teacher needs to teach a virtual and in-person simultaneously? Why are you assuming that's the case? Because it's convenient for your case?

Because that's how it's laid out. What would you have the kids do the other 2 days a week ?

asynchronous work. it’s not that hard to figure out!

It amounts to part time school. And complete full time child minding for the smaller kids.

I mean, that’s effectively what we have now with DL. The amount of direct instruction minutes is part time; the balance of the work is asynchronous. kids going to school “part time” and then doing the rest of the work asynchronously (or let’s just call it “homework”) is better.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:But who says that hybrid means a teacher needs to teach a virtual and in-person simultaneously? Why are you assuming that's the case? Because it's convenient for your case?

Because that's how it's laid out. What would you have the kids do the other 2 days a week ?

asynchronous work. it’s not that hard to figure out!

It amounts to part time school. And complete full time child minding for the smaller kids.

I mean, that’s effectively what we have now with DL. The amount of direct instruction minutes is part time; the balance of the work is asynchronous. kids going to school “part time” and then doing the rest of the work asynchronously (or let’s just call it “homework”) is better.

But your kids are learning new things every day and they check in with their teachers through live instruction every day. I think parents are happier to have their kid occupied daily rather than have 3 full days a week where they must organize and provide all the supervision. What you are suggesting means the teacher has to repeat the same lesson twice -- meaning the kids by definition are learning less.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:But who says that hybrid means a teacher needs to teach a virtual and in-person simultaneously? Why are you assuming that's the case? Because it's convenient for your case?

Because that's how it's laid out. What would you have the kids do the other 2 days a week ?

asynchronous work. it’s not that hard to figure out!

It amounts to part time school. And complete full time child minding for the smaller kids.

I mean, that’s effectively what we have now with DL. The amount of direct instruction minutes is part time; the balance of the work is asynchronous. kids going to school “part time” and then doing the rest of the work asynchronously (or let’s just call it “homework”) is better.

But your kids are learning new things every day and they check in with their teachers through live instruction every day. I think parents are happier to have their kid occupied daily rather than have 3 full days a week where they must organize and provide all the supervision. What you are suggesting means the teacher has to repeat the same lesson twice -- meaning the kids by definition are learning less.

This. My kid is progressing in math because every day her teacher does a lesson that builds on what they did the day before, then they do a problem set, then check in with the teacher with any questions. Then they have some asynchronous time to reinforce the lesson with Zearn or something. Then the next day, they move forward in the curriculum. With three days off, how does that work? You can't give ES students three full days of homework, at least not without expecting parents to be teaching this stuff and spending even more time supervising their kids' learning, on top of whatever other responsibilities they have.

If they could do in-person half-days five days a week, I think that would be more valuable -- lessons in the morning, asynch in the afternoon, or vice-versa. But that was never apparently on the table.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:But who says that hybrid means a teacher needs to teach a virtual and in-person simultaneously? Why are you assuming that's the case? Because it's convenient for your case?

Because that's how it's laid out. What would you have the kids do the other 2 days a week ?

asynchronous work. it’s not that hard to figure out!

It amounts to part time school. And complete full time child minding for the smaller kids.

I mean, that’s effectively what we have now with DL. The amount of direct instruction minutes is part time; the balance of the work is asynchronous. kids going to school “part time” and then doing the rest of the work asynchronously (or let’s just call it “homework”) is better.

But your kids are learning new things every day and they check in with their teachers through live instruction every day. I think parents are happier to have their kid occupied daily rather than have 3 full days a week where they must organize and provide all the supervision. What you are suggesting means the teacher has to repeat the same lesson twice -- meaning the kids by definition are learning less.

That makes no sense. My kid already has 1 day a week asynchronous. 2 or 3 days live and an extra asynchronous day or 2 would be a HUGE improvement.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:But who says that hybrid means a teacher needs to teach a virtual and in-person simultaneously? Why are you assuming that's the case? Because it's convenient for your case?

Because that's how it's laid out. What would you have the kids do the other 2 days a week ?

asynchronous work. it’s not that hard to figure out!

It amounts to part time school. And complete full time child minding for the smaller kids.

I mean, that’s effectively what we have now with DL. The amount of direct instruction minutes is part time; the balance of the work is asynchronous. kids going to school “part time” and then doing the rest of the work asynchronously (or let’s just call it “homework”) is better.

But your kids are learning new things every day and they check in with their teachers through live instruction every day. I think parents are happier to have their kid occupied daily rather than have 3 full days a week where they must organize and provide all the supervision. What you are suggesting means the teacher has to repeat the same lesson twice -- meaning the kids by definition are learning less.

This. My kid is progressing in math because every day her teacher does a lesson that builds on what they did the day before, then they do a problem set, then check in with the teacher with any questions. Then they have some asynchronous time to reinforce the lesson with Zearn or something. Then the next day, they move forward in the curriculum. With three days off, how does that work? You can't give ES students three full days of homework, at least not without expecting parents to be teaching this stuff and spending even more time supervising their kids' learning, on top of whatever other responsibilities they have.

If they could do in-person half-days five days a week, I think that would be more valuable -- lessons in the morning, asynch in the afternoon, or vice-versa. But that was never apparently on the table.

feel free to enroll in Friendship PCS’s online charter school.

the rest of us want to send our kids to school.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:But who says that hybrid means a teacher needs to teach a virtual and in-person simultaneously? Why are you assuming that's the case? Because it's convenient for your case?

Because that's how it's laid out. What would you have the kids do the other 2 days a week ?

Because anything else would just be part-time school. There is no way to have twice as many teachers and that is what you would need. I could get by with 3 days a week completely asynchronous, but on a policy level I don't think it's very good.

I mean, that might work for a 5th grader, but a 6 year old isn't going to learn with 3 days or asychronous. Basically the teacher has to teach both groups at the same time or it's part time school.

This is exactly wrong. The 6 year old isn't learning much of anything via DL, unless they have a caregiver giving them a ton of support (otherwise known as "in-person school", but it's happening at home). But a 6 year old going to actual in-person school with a teacher 2 days a week, with 3 days of asynchronous at home will learn a lot more than a kid doing daily DL at home without help from a parent. Plus the parents will have more capacity to help with the 3 days of asynchronous if their kid is in school two days a week.

[Anonymous]

I believe we all want to send our kids to school - this is not ideal in any way. How are we going to keep teachers safe, as well as kids and families if we keep having outbreaks with superspreader events? How are we going to staff classrooms when the child's teacher gets sick and cannot teach or has to quarantine due to exposure and cannot get into the classroom. We need lots of N95 masks for everyone, we needs lots of cleaning supplies (recent research says on certain surfaces it can remain up to a month). We don't have that yet and don't appear to have that coming in short order. Once we have both the will and the way to solve that shortage of PPE, risking due to lack of something that should be easy to organize our companies to produce and prevent infections risks people's lives and is not something that makes sense.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I believe we all want to send our kids to school - this is not ideal in any way. How are we going to keep teachers safe, as well as kids and families if we keep having outbreaks with superspreader events? How are we going to staff classrooms when the child's teacher gets sick and cannot teach or has to quarantine due to exposure and cannot get into the classroom. We need lots of N95 masks for everyone, we needs lots of cleaning supplies (recent research says on certain surfaces it can remain up to a month). We don't have that yet and don't appear to have that coming in short order. Once we have both the will and the way to solve that shortage of PPE, risking due to lack of something that should be easy to organize our companies to produce and prevent infections risks people's lives and is not something that makes sense.

1) “keeping teachers safe” is actually not the primary goal here.
2) the evidence increasingly shows it is safe

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:But who says that hybrid means a teacher needs to teach a virtual and in-person simultaneously? Why are you assuming that's the case? Because it's convenient for your case?

Because that's how it's laid out. What would you have the kids do the other 2 days a week ?

Because anything else would just be part-time school. There is no way to have twice as many teachers and that is what you would need. I could get by with 3 days a week completely asynchronous, but on a policy level I don't think it's very good.

I mean, that might work for a 5th grader, but a 6 year old isn't going to learn with 3 days or asychronous. Basically the teacher has to teach both groups at the same time or it's part time school.

part time in person school is likely better than what we have now.

Definitely! I don’t understand the resistance to part-time school. Have you been paying attention to DL?! Do you think this is an effective solution?!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:But who says that hybrid means a teacher needs to teach a virtual and in-person simultaneously? Why are you assuming that's the case? Because it's convenient for your case?

Because that's how it's laid out. What would you have the kids do the other 2 days a week ?

asynchronous work. it’s not that hard to figure out!

It amounts to part time school. And complete full time child minding for the smaller kids.

I mean, that’s effectively what we have now with DL. The amount of direct instruction minutes is part time; the balance of the work is asynchronous. kids going to school “part time” and then doing the rest of the work asynchronously (or let’s just call it “homework”) is better.

But your kids are learning new things every day and they check in with their teachers through live instruction every day. I think parents are happier to have their kid occupied daily rather than have 3 full days a week where they must organize and provide all the supervision. What you are suggesting means the teacher has to repeat the same lesson twice -- meaning the kids by definition are learning less.

This. My kid is progressing in math because every day her teacher does a lesson that builds on what they did the day before, then they do a problem set, then check in with the teacher with any questions. Then they have some asynchronous time to reinforce the lesson with Zearn or something. Then the next day, they move forward in the curriculum. With three days off, how does that work? You can't give ES students three full days of homework, at least not without expecting parents to be teaching this stuff and spending even more time supervising their kids' learning, on top of whatever other responsibilities they have.

If they could do in-person half-days five days a week, I think that would be more valuable -- lessons in the morning, asynch in the afternoon, or vice-versa. But that was never apparently on the table.

feel free to enroll in Friendship PCS’s online charter school.

the rest of us want to send our kids to school.

The real solution here is to invest in some technology so that the teacher CAN teach online and at home at once. Mic the teacher, speakers and mics in the classroom. Extra monitor for the teacher. This is what a lot of private schools are doing and its a heck of a lot cheaper than hiring more aides.

[Anonymous]

the reason is the teachers union. they want to shutter schools until everyone is vaccinated, and bowser doesn't want to fight with the teachers union.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:the reason is the teachers union. they want to shutter schools until everyone is vaccinated, and bowser doesn't want to fight with the teachers union.

If that were true, non-unionized charters would be reopening.