WP Article on LAMB's failure to re-open

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Yu Ying basically did the same thing LAMB did. While claiming to "follow the science," the decision to close, per the mass email parents received, was based on teachers' feelings. Yu Ying was set to open in October, then November. Now it's January. Parents have no power but to hope teachers "feel safe" in January.

How are Yu Ying teachers defining "safe"?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Yu Ying basically did the same thing LAMB did. While claiming to "follow the science," the decision to close, per the mass email parents received, was based on teachers' feelings. Yu Ying was set to open in October, then November. Now it's January. Parents have no power but to hope teachers "feel safe" in January.

Turns out teachers' feelings are more important than scientific facts.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Yu Ying basically did the same thing LAMB did. While claiming to "follow the science," the decision to close, per the mass email parents received, was based on teachers' feelings. Yu Ying was set to open in October, then November. Now it's January. Parents have no power but to hope teachers "feel safe" in January.

Turns out teachers' feelings are more important than scientific facts.

Or the rights of children.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Yu Ying basically did the same thing LAMB did. While claiming to "follow the science," the decision to close, per the mass email parents received, was based on teachers' feelings. Yu Ying was set to open in October, then November. Now it's January. Parents have no power but to hope teachers "feel safe" in January.

Turns out teachers' feelings are more important than scientific facts.

It's like we live in some small town in Mississippi. Facts don't matter. The only thing that matters is what people want to believe.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:This article is a really skewed perspective- at every parent meeting, there has been an overwhelming majority of parents supportive of the school’s decision, and there have been a small handful (like 5) really vocal parents who want the school to re-open (two of whom are quoted in the article). I say this as a parent who is desperate for school to reopen, and disappointed in the decision, but also trust the school and want to go back only when it’s safe to do so.

The school communicated poorly, no question. They shouldn’t have made it seem like reopening in October was likely, when they shared at the end of September. But I don’t think is as big of a deal that the article is making it out to be. Especially when the reporter only talked with two disgruntled parents and didn’t mention the reopening status of any other charters, and barely mentioned DCPS’ current mess with reopening plans.

DCB is not reopening and is saying they will "only when its safe" but have not (and will not it seems) define safe. It's very frustrating as a parent to have no idea where the goal posts are set. And, cynically, it seems like the school just wants to stay closed for their own reasons. So, I'd say yes, the epic breakdown in communication is at least at DCB too.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This article is a really skewed perspective- at every parent meeting, there has been an overwhelming majority of parents supportive of the school’s decision, and there have been a small handful (like 5) really vocal parents who want the school to re-open (two of whom are quoted in the article). I say this as a parent who is desperate for school to reopen, and disappointed in the decision, but also trust the school and want to go back only when it’s safe to do so.

The school communicated poorly, no question. They shouldn’t have made it seem like reopening in October was likely, when they shared at the end of September. But I don’t think is as big of a deal that the article is making it out to be. Especially when the reporter only talked with two disgruntled parents and didn’t mention the reopening status of any other charters, and barely mentioned DCPS’ current mess with reopening plans.

DCB is not reopening and is saying they will "only when its safe" but have not (and will not it seems) define safe. It's very frustrating as a parent to have no idea where the goal posts are set. And, cynically, it seems like the school just wants to stay closed for their own reasons. So, I'd say yes, the epic breakdown in communication is at least at DCB too.

No one will define "safe" because there's basically no widely accepted health metric a school could come up with that DC doesn't already meet.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Yu Ying basically did the same thing LAMB did. While claiming to "follow the science," the decision to close, per the mass email parents received, was based on teachers' feelings. Yu Ying was set to open in October, then November. Now it's January. Parents have no power but to hope teachers "feel safe" in January.

Turns out teachers' feelings are more important than scientific facts.

It's like we live in some small town in Mississippi. Facts don't matter. The only thing that matters is what people want to believe.

I agree. Families in DC have been largely following all the protocols much better than most of the country - high mask usage, social distancing, low infection rate, and yet the science and facts don't matter. I come from a family of teaches and have a lot of respect for them, but this is just unreasonable. It seems the teachers are willing to let the children suffer and want to play politics like everything else in DC. Do they not see the damage to the kid's mental health and academic growth by being home for so long? Do they think this is safe for kids? They don't care, not really.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:This article is a really skewed perspective- at every parent meeting, there has been an overwhelming majority of parents supportive of the school’s decision, and there have been a small handful (like 5) really vocal parents who want the school to re-open (two of whom are quoted in the article). I say this as a parent who is desperate for school to reopen, and disappointed in the decision, but also trust the school and want to go back only when it’s safe to do so.

The school communicated poorly, no question. They shouldn’t have made it seem like reopening in October was likely, when they shared at the end of September. But I don’t think is as big of a deal that the article is making it out to be. Especially when the reporter only talked with two disgruntled parents and didn’t mention the reopening status of any other charters, and barely mentioned DCPS’ current mess with reopening plans.

There are a lot more than 5 disgruntled parents. I am one of them, but, I support the school leadership more than these (very brand-new) parents quoted in the article. That said, I do not think the majority are disgruntled, but I have no idea, since the school hasn't surveyed parents since July about their interest to return. Many parents who do not agree with the school may be afraid to speak up given that they could be shot down publicly.

I wish the school would acknowledge that it pulled a 180 on parents, communicated poorly, and that its decisions have a major impact on the lives of 450 families at home (and our kids), so they should be both more careful and more transparent. They also should care what parents think, even if it's weighted less than other factors. Good and transparent communication would do wonders for parents feeling supportive and sucking it up for an entire school year of lost or lesser learning. Also, parents will trust the decision much more if they have all the information being used to decide. This article did a better job explaining the thinking process than the meetings and messages to parents have, and for that I was glad to read it. I personally read it as an example of what all the charters are dealing with right now, and hope to see more reporting about other schools - did not think it showed LAMB in an especially poor light given the circumstances.

Parents who already agreed with the decision being made probably feel the school is being fully communicative, but it is those who don't fully agree who see key gaps more readily.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This article is a really skewed perspective- at every parent meeting, there has been an overwhelming majority of parents supportive of the school’s decision, and there have been a small handful (like 5) really vocal parents who want the school to re-open (two of whom are quoted in the article). I say this as a parent who is desperate for school to reopen, and disappointed in the decision, but also trust the school and want to go back only when it’s safe to do so.

The school communicated poorly, no question. They shouldn’t have made it seem like reopening in October was likely, when they shared at the end of September. But I don’t think is as big of a deal that the article is making it out to be. Especially when the reporter only talked with two disgruntled parents and didn’t mention the reopening status of any other charters, and barely mentioned DCPS’ current mess with reopening plans.

There are a lot more than 5 disgruntled parents. I am one of them, but, I support the school leadership more than these (very brand-new) parents quoted in the article. That said, I do not think the majority are disgruntled, but I have no idea, since the school hasn't surveyed parents since July about their interest to return. Many parents who do not agree with the school may be afraid to speak up given that they could be shot down publicly.

I wish the school would acknowledge that it pulled a 180 on parents, communicated poorly, and that its decisions have a major impact on the lives of 450 families at home (and our kids), so they should be both more careful and more transparent. They also should care what parents think, even if it's weighted less than other factors. Good and transparent communication would do wonders for parents feeling supportive and sucking it up for an entire school year of lost or lesser learning. Also, parents will trust the decision much more if they have all the information being used to decide. This article did a better job explaining the thinking process than the meetings and messages to parents have, and for that I was glad to read it. I personally read it as an example of what all the charters are dealing with right now, and hope to see more reporting about other schools - did not think it showed LAMB in an especially poor light given the circumstances.

Parents who already agreed with the decision being made probably feel the school is being fully communicative, but it is those who don't fully agree who see key gaps more readily.

“Brand new” parents are the ones most likely to want reopening since their kids are least able to do DL. So I don’t think that should disqualify their opinion.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Yu Ying basically did the same thing LAMB did. While claiming to "follow the science," the decision to close, per the mass email parents received, was based on teachers' feelings. Yu Ying was set to open in October, then November. Now it's January. Parents have no power but to hope teachers "feel safe" in January.

Turns out teachers' feelings are more important than scientific facts.

It's like we live in some small town in Mississippi. Facts don't matter. The only thing that matters is what people want to believe.

I agree. Families in DC have been largely following all the protocols much better than most of the country - high mask usage, social distancing, low infection rate, and yet the science and facts don't matter. I come from a family of teaches and have a lot of respect for them, but this is just unreasonable. It seems the teachers are willing to let the children suffer and want to play politics like everything else in DC. Do they not see the damage to the kid's mental health and academic growth by being home for so long? Do they think this is safe for kids? They don't care, not really.

You live in a ridiculous bubble. Only SOME families in DC have been following protocols. If all families were following protocols, then Columbia Heights, Petworth, Brightwood and other areas of Northern Ward 4 wouldn't still be red on the COVID map. There is still plenty of transmission happening, and there's no way I'd send my kids to their Ward 4 Charter school with the current numbers in this area.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This article is a really skewed perspective- at every parent meeting, there has been an overwhelming majority of parents supportive of the school’s decision, and there have been a small handful (like 5) really vocal parents who want the school to re-open (two of whom are quoted in the article). I say this as a parent who is desperate for school to reopen, and disappointed in the decision, but also trust the school and want to go back only when it’s safe to do so.

The school communicated poorly, no question. They shouldn’t have made it seem like reopening in October was likely, when they shared at the end of September. But I don’t think is as big of a deal that the article is making it out to be. Especially when the reporter only talked with two disgruntled parents and didn’t mention the reopening status of any other charters, and barely mentioned DCPS’ current mess with reopening plans.

There are a lot more than 5 disgruntled parents. I am one of them, but, I support the school leadership more than these (very brand-new) parents quoted in the article. That said, I do not think the majority are disgruntled, but I have no idea, since the school hasn't surveyed parents since July about their interest to return. Many parents who do not agree with the school may be afraid to speak up given that they could be shot down publicly.

I wish the school would acknowledge that it pulled a 180 on parents, communicated poorly, and that its decisions have a major impact on the lives of 450 families at home (and our kids), so they should be both more careful and more transparent. They also should care what parents think, even if it's weighted less than other factors. Good and transparent communication would do wonders for parents feeling supportive and sucking it up for an entire school year of lost or lesser learning. Also, parents will trust the decision much more if they have all the information being used to decide. This article did a better job explaining the thinking process than the meetings and messages to parents have, and for that I was glad to read it. I personally read it as an example of what all the charters are dealing with right now, and hope to see more reporting about other schools - did not think it showed LAMB in an especially poor light given the circumstances.

Parents who already agreed with the decision being made probably feel the school is being fully communicative, but it is those who don't fully agree who see key gaps more readily.

“Brand new” parents are the ones most likely to want reopening since their kids are least able to do DL. So I don’t think that should disqualify their opinion.

Yeah, I see "brand new" used frequently to discredit people who have concerns about the way their schools are handling things. You don't have less of a stake in the outcomes just because you're new.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Yu Ying basically did the same thing LAMB did. While claiming to "follow the science," the decision to close, per the mass email parents received, was based on teachers' feelings. Yu Ying was set to open in October, then November. Now it's January. Parents have no power but to hope teachers "feel safe" in January.

Turns out teachers' feelings are more important than scientific facts.

It's like we live in some small town in Mississippi. Facts don't matter. The only thing that matters is what people want to believe.

I agree. Families in DC have been largely following all the protocols much better than most of the country - high mask usage, social distancing, low infection rate, and yet the science and facts don't matter. I come from a family of teaches and have a lot of respect for them, but this is just unreasonable. It seems the teachers are willing to let the children suffer and want to play politics like everything else in DC. Do they not see the damage to the kid's mental health and academic growth by being home for so long? Do they think this is safe for kids? They don't care, not really.

You live in a ridiculous bubble. Only SOME families in DC have been following protocols. If all families were following protocols, then Columbia Heights, Petworth, Brightwood and other areas of Northern Ward 4 wouldn't still be red on the COVID map. There is still plenty of transmission happening, and there's no way I'd send my kids to their Ward 4 Charter school with the current numbers in this area.

Actually very few people in DC, in Ward 4 and elsewhere, have coronavirus. Look at the city's data.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Yu Ying basically did the same thing LAMB did. While claiming to "follow the science," the decision to close, per the mass email parents received, was based on teachers' feelings. Yu Ying was set to open in October, then November. Now it's January. Parents have no power but to hope teachers "feel safe" in January.

Turns out teachers' feelings are more important than scientific facts.

+1

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This article is a really skewed perspective- at every parent meeting, there has been an overwhelming majority of parents supportive of the school’s decision, and there have been a small handful (like 5) really vocal parents who want the school to re-open (two of whom are quoted in the article). I say this as a parent who is desperate for school to reopen, and disappointed in the decision, but also trust the school and want to go back only when it’s safe to do so.

The school communicated poorly, no question. They shouldn’t have made it seem like reopening in October was likely, when they shared at the end of September. But I don’t think is as big of a deal that the article is making it out to be. Especially when the reporter only talked with two disgruntled parents and didn’t mention the reopening status of any other charters, and barely mentioned DCPS’ current mess with reopening plans.

There are a lot more than 5 disgruntled parents. I am one of them, but, I support the school leadership more than these (very brand-new) parents quoted in the article. That said, I do not think the majority are disgruntled, but I have no idea, since the school hasn't surveyed parents since July about their interest to return. Many parents who do not agree with the school may be afraid to speak up given that they could be shot down publicly.

I wish the school would acknowledge that it pulled a 180 on parents, communicated poorly, and that its decisions have a major impact on the lives of 450 families at home (and our kids), so they should be both more careful and more transparent. They also should care what parents think, even if it's weighted less than other factors. Good and transparent communication would do wonders for parents feeling supportive and sucking it up for an entire school year of lost or lesser learning. Also, parents will trust the decision much more if they have all the information being used to decide. This article did a better job explaining the thinking process than the meetings and messages to parents have, and for that I was glad to read it. I personally read it as an example of what all the charters are dealing with right now, and hope to see more reporting about other schools - did not think it showed LAMB in an especially poor light given the circumstances.

Parents who already agreed with the decision being made probably feel the school is being fully communicative, but it is those who don't fully agree who see key gaps more readily.

“Brand new” parents are the ones most likely to want reopening since their kids are least able to do DL. So I don’t think that should disqualify their opinion.

Yeah, I see "brand new" used frequently to discredit people who have concerns about the way their schools are handling things. You don't have less of a stake in the outcomes just because you're new.

I do think their concerns are valid, especially since PK age is the hardest to do DL. Mention brand new because it is also true they have less familiarity and sometimes miss key knowledge about how things work in a school (it's not a daycare), as well as less personal connections with admin and especially teachers.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
I wish the school would acknowledge that it pulled a 180 on parents, communicated poorly, and that its decisions have a major impact on the lives of 450 families at home (and our kids), so they should be both more careful and more transparent. They also should care what parents think, even if it's weighted less than other factors. Good and transparent communication would do wonders for parents feeling supportive and sucking it up for an entire school year of lost or lesser learning. Also, parents will trust the decision much more if they have all the information being used to decide. This article did a better job explaining the thinking process than the meetings and messages to parents have, and for that I was glad to read it.

+1