Yes, PP, that's exactly right. You hear this attitude in places where parents are more affluent- have access to work-from-home policies or where stay at home moms are the norm. |
If you are making this argument now, you're about 10 months too late. But if you were slow to understand the implications of accepting your contract of employment this year, by all means, decline the new one for the next school year if it is offered to you. |
| See the thread “why did we ever send sick kids to school?” A parent literally just claimed that her child with a cough or a low grade fever is entitled to attend school. This is one of the major reasons I went remote this year after starting in person. I realized people wouldn’t alter their behavior even after hundreds of thousands of viral deaths. |
| Teachers have the vaccine now so this should really put a lot of these fears and judgments to rest. |
I was that poster. I said that pre-pandemic a child with a low grade fever or a cough is entitled to attend school at every school that my children have ever attended. This is not the case during the pandemic. |
We have traveled locally, mostly remote cabins or AirBnBs. The couple of times we have had other people with us indoors was whenever one got tested and took all precautions to ensure safety. I'd be disappointed if our teachers judge us on it without giving any attention to our circumstances. The teachers are acting as if keeping the kids at home is completely safe. It's not, not after a year of being at home! The kids are suffering, and it's a shame you can't see that and blame the parents for doing what they have to. And our lifestyle is going to be different if the kids start going to school. Our pod has kids from different schools, of course, we'll limit that interaction as these kids start to interact and be in different circles. Why are you comparing the behavior when people are at home to what they'll start doing when the kids are in school? And remember you'll be vaccinated, those kids are not. So I don't know where you get the notion that all the risk is yours and none for the families involved? How much value are you placing on the families of your students? |
??? I don't think you understand... The children in POOR families are the ones who ARE NOT registering for hybrid or concurrent; the children in MIDDLE CLASS families are the ones who ARE registering for hybrid or concurrent. If you're framing this as a battle of the poor versus the middle class then you're on the wrong team because the data from high FARMS schools validates that the low SES children want to stay DL. The middle class families are the ones advocating RTS. So teachers are making the same choices that the poor kids are. It is the mean mommies in the middle class families who are trying to force teachers to do things they think are unsafe. |
Teachers are entitled to place a higher value on their health than their concern about your child's education. If you don't like it then you can do something else. But no teacher should prioritize your concerns over their own. |
+1 |
Ooo it's SHOUTING TIME! We are talking about teacher perceptions, which really have little to do with reality. It really doesn't matter to the point that poor parents are sending their kids back to IPL at lower rates than high-SES households. There are gonna be some poor kids with parents who work in person, and those kids are going to be in the classroom. However, you don't see teachers freaking about the risk that these kids carry. So it's not about risk being higher. It's about risk that they deem acceptable based on their judgments of the behavior of others. (Sidenote: I don't think the WOTP people count as "middle class," and that's who you are referencing.) The 20% of children who are currently back in person at DCPS are low-income and high needs. Are they real, or are they just cancelled out of the equation somehow because they are poor? |
Of course. Teachers can look at what they perceive as risks and make choices accordingly. Soon, that choice will be to either get vaccinated and go in, or quit. Right now there are other options. I personally wouldn't blame them if they wanted to quit; I have no control over their real or imagined feelings. |
| ^^^Edit: Their real or imagined *risks*, not *feelings*. |
+1 |
|
I am not hearing teacher talk about whether they are willing to teach the kids of parents who have to work in person. I am hearing people say that they aren’t sending their kids back (which we know is not true. There are some.). Or that teachers have the right to decide.
I think they’re deliberately side-stepping this question because of what the answer implies. |
|
I see a lot of people speculating that teachers just don't care about x or parents just don't care about y. Who cares about what is not the issue. We all have boundaries in our lives, things we will not tolerate. It is pretty rare that conversation with other people changes those boundaries. Further, we cannot force other people to change to suit our own needs. I know life would be easier that way, but people can only control their own actions, not others.
So, given the above, a lot of teachers have boundaries for what it will take for them to feel safe. There are a lot of reasons why teachers have those boundaries, and it is really none of our business. They can absolutely care about the children, but feel the need to put themselves first. After all, no one on this planet is in charge of ensuring another neurotypical adult's well-being. The only person who can take care of you is you. In fact, teachers have been telling people for a long time pre-COVID that they care about their students, but they cannot solve the most pressing societal problems that interfere with student learning. No matter how much one loves teaching, at the end of the day it is a job and nothing more. Teachers can invest a lot in students, and it does not mean that administrators or the community will invest any more back in teachers. |