Classes crammed together in cafeterias doing asynchronous learning

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I just can't wrap my mind around you people who would rather have your kid getting disorganized, asychronous "education" in a cafeteria while almost certainly being exposed to several other kids with the virus while they're in there. And you think this is better than having your kid get live virtual instruction for a week or two while safe at home? Can you explain it to me?

Simple, they don't want the responsibility.

DP, and no, it’s mostly two things. First, I have three elementary school kids and DH and I work full-time; between their ages and our schedules, “live virtual instruction” is stressful and worthless for them.

Second, I don’t trust for a second that virtual will be for a week or two. I literally cannot fathom how you (or anyone) can trust MCPS at this point to bring kids back in any kind of reasonable timeframe.

Third, I also don’t understand how people *still* do not get that plenty of kids are not “safe” at home. Not from COVID, not from being left unsupervised, etc. Are you that naive?

Huh? Are you kidding me? Given how despite bad things are-- way worse than they've ever been-- they're still resisting letting kids go virtual at all, it doesn't make sense to me that people are serious worrying that it's going to drag on forever. Is this just you guys having PTSD and learning the wrong lesson from their decisions last year? Because if what you learned is "MCPS loves virtual" rather than "MCPS is poorly managed and caters to the parents who put up the biggest fuss," you're not paying attention. It's obvious to anyone who's willing to look at the situation objectively that clearly they've massively overcorrected and have switched to be dead-set against virtual unless they get dragged into it kicking and screaming.

The drama queen is back.

"Things" are not that bad and they are certainly not "way worse" than they've ever been. A few people are out with what amounts to a bad cold or the flu.

Cases are 5 times higher than they've ever been (probably worse because test positivity rates indicate we're missing tons of cases), hospitalizations are as high as they've ever been and climbing, and we're facing a variant which has been studied for less than 6 weeks, has had some dramatic changes in how it affects the body, and whose long-term effects we know almost nothing about. Not sure how people can possibly manage to be casual about this unless they're scientifically illiterate or deep in denial.

+1

So, you two know more than (checks notes) literally every credible scientist out there? Better than Fauci? Ashish Jha? Leana Wen, FFS? You two have determined that virtual, and all it comes with*, is better for kids than COVID?

*claiming it’s “just virtual” is disingenuous AF, and you know it

No legit scientist is dismissing covid/omicron as NBD. There are disagreements on how to weigh the importance of virtual vs in-person school, which is fair, but the folks who advocate for kids being in school are doing it because they believe that in-person school is important enough that it's worth the risks of covid (which, frankly, is not necessarily in their lane as a scientist, but it's fine, we all have opinions about this stuff.)

I can respect an argument that says "in person education is really really important, so kids should stay in person," even if I disagree. But I will call out people who try to make the argument that "omicron is mild/not worth worrying about/just like colds or flu" any day of the week-- that is misinformation and not supported by the science.

Lol even if it's not "in their lane (which it is--education researchers are in a number of fields)," all major educational organizations have also called for children to be in person.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I just can't wrap my mind around you people who would rather have your kid getting disorganized, asychronous "education" in a cafeteria while almost certainly being exposed to several other kids with the virus while they're in there. And you think this is better than having your kid get live virtual instruction for a week or two while safe at home? Can you explain it to me?

Simple, they don't want the responsibility.

DP, and no, it’s mostly two things. First, I have three elementary school kids and DH and I work full-time; between their ages and our schedules, “live virtual instruction” is stressful and worthless for them.

Second, I don’t trust for a second that virtual will be for a week or two. I literally cannot fathom how you (or anyone) can trust MCPS at this point to bring kids back in any kind of reasonable timeframe.

Third, I also don’t understand how people *still* do not get that plenty of kids are not “safe” at home. Not from COVID, not from being left unsupervised, etc. Are you that naive?

Huh? Are you kidding me? Given how despite bad things are-- way worse than they've ever been-- they're still resisting letting kids go virtual at all, it doesn't make sense to me that people are serious worrying that it's going to drag on forever. Is this just you guys having PTSD and learning the wrong lesson from their decisions last year? Because if what you learned is "MCPS loves virtual" rather than "MCPS is poorly managed and caters to the parents who put up the biggest fuss," you're not paying attention. It's obvious to anyone who's willing to look at the situation objectively that clearly they've massively overcorrected and have switched to be dead-set against virtual unless they get dragged into it kicking and screaming.

If MCPS loved virtual, VA would be bigger and have equal funding.

[Anonymous]

More and more of this happening: https://mobile.twitter.com/ResourcefulMom/status/1479112791071944706

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:If it's safe without masks at lunch it's fine with masks, right?

Hmmm I think you missed the point. It’s not safe at lunch and Covid is likely spreading at lunchtime.

It’s safer with masks but if they are cloth or surgical masks, then it would likely still be pretty risky.

[Anonymous]

I’m probably missing something, but it seems like this is unnecessarily inventing a problem. We were told at our ES that if our child’s teacher gets Covid, the class would go virtual for two weeks from home. Why wasn’t that done here? If they want to offer an in school space for kids who do not have a parent to stay home with them, I’m on board with that.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I just can't wrap my mind around you people who would rather have your kid getting disorganized, asychronous "education" in a cafeteria while almost certainly being exposed to several other kids with the virus while they're in there. And you think this is better than having your kid get live virtual instruction for a week or two while safe at home? Can you explain it to me?

Simple, they don't want the responsibility.

DP, and no, it’s mostly two things. First, I have three elementary school kids and DH and I work full-time; between their ages and our schedules, “live virtual instruction” is stressful and worthless for them.

Second, I don’t trust for a second that virtual will be for a week or two. I literally cannot fathom how you (or anyone) can trust MCPS at this point to bring kids back in any kind of reasonable timeframe.

Third, I also don’t understand how people *still* do not get that plenty of kids are not “safe” at home. Not from COVID, not from being left unsupervised, etc. Are you that naive?

Huh? Are you kidding me? Given how despite bad things are-- way worse than they've ever been-- they're still resisting letting kids go virtual at all, it doesn't make sense to me that people are serious worrying that it's going to drag on forever. Is this just you guys having PTSD and learning the wrong lesson from their decisions last year? Because if what you learned is "MCPS loves virtual" rather than "MCPS is poorly managed and caters to the parents who put up the biggest fuss," you're not paying attention. It's obvious to anyone who's willing to look at the situation objectively that clearly they've massively overcorrected and have switched to be dead-set against virtual unless they get dragged into it kicking and screaming.

What are you talking about- MCPS is not resistant to virtual. Based on the number of red schools today, I wouldn’t be surprised if everyone is virtual next week. Will you be happy then? If they were resistant to virtual, they would have stick with the original line that they’d only go virtual if directed by the state. This was all I’ve big set up to justify moving to virtual.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The issue is that positive results require quarantine or isolation for multiple days. Staffing just won’t be consistent for a while, so it’s better to do some learning in a controlled fashion rather than waiting for the shoe to drop each night.

+1 trillion. We needs some predictability (parents, students, teachers, staff, bus drivers, the broader community), and we have none. Other counties have greater predictability with their plans, regardless of their particular shortcomings. There's no winning in an historic pandemic, but a policy that promotes instability amplifies the rest of the pandemic's challenges. Everyone loses. A zero-sum mentality and policy cannot work.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I just can't wrap my mind around you people who would rather have your kid getting disorganized, asychronous "education" in a cafeteria while almost certainly being exposed to several other kids with the virus while they're in there. And you think this is better than having your kid get live virtual instruction for a week or two while safe at home? Can you explain it to me?

Simple, they don't want the responsibility.

DP, and no, it’s mostly two things. First, I have three elementary school kids and DH and I work full-time; between their ages and our schedules, “live virtual instruction” is stressful and worthless for them.

Second, I don’t trust for a second that virtual will be for a week or two. I literally cannot fathom how you (or anyone) can trust MCPS at this point to bring kids back in any kind of reasonable timeframe.

Third, I also don’t understand how people *still* do not get that plenty of kids are not “safe” at home. Not from COVID, not from being left unsupervised, etc. Are you that naive?

Huh? Are you kidding me? Given how despite bad things are-- way worse than they've ever been-- they're still resisting letting kids go virtual at all, it doesn't make sense to me that people are serious worrying that it's going to drag on forever. Is this just you guys having PTSD and learning the wrong lesson from their decisions last year? Because if what you learned is "MCPS loves virtual" rather than "MCPS is poorly managed and caters to the parents who put up the biggest fuss," you're not paying attention. It's obvious to anyone who's willing to look at the situation objectively that clearly they've massively overcorrected and have switched to be dead-set against virtual unless they get dragged into it kicking and screaming.

The drama queen is back.

"Things" are not that bad and they are certainly not "way worse" than they've ever been. A few people are out with what amounts to a bad cold or the flu.

Cases are 5 times higher than they've ever been (probably worse because test positivity rates indicate we're missing tons of cases), hospitalizations are as high as they've ever been and climbing, and we're facing a variant which has been studied for less than 6 weeks, has had some dramatic changes in how it affects the body, and whose long-term effects we know almost nothing about. Not sure how people can possibly manage to be casual about this unless they're scientifically illiterate or deep in denial.

This is so true,
Signed the parent of a child with serious Long COVID

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I just can't wrap my mind around you people who would rather have your kid getting disorganized, asychronous "education" in a cafeteria while almost certainly being exposed to several other kids with the virus while they're in there. And you think this is better than having your kid get live virtual instruction for a week or two while safe at home? Can you explain it to me?

Simple, they don't want the responsibility.

DP, and no, it’s mostly two things. First, I have three elementary school kids and DH and I work full-time; between their ages and our schedules, “live virtual instruction” is stressful and worthless for them.

Second, I don’t trust for a second that virtual will be for a week or two. I literally cannot fathom how you (or anyone) can trust MCPS at this point to bring kids back in any kind of reasonable timeframe.

Third, I also don’t understand how people *still* do not get that plenty of kids are not “safe” at home. Not from COVID, not from being left unsupervised, etc. Are you that naive?

Huh? Are you kidding me? Given how despite bad things are-- way worse than they've ever been-- they're still resisting letting kids go virtual at all, it doesn't make sense to me that people are serious worrying that it's going to drag on forever. Is this just you guys having PTSD and learning the wrong lesson from their decisions last year? Because if what you learned is "MCPS loves virtual" rather than "MCPS is poorly managed and caters to the parents who put up the biggest fuss," you're not paying attention. It's obvious to anyone who's willing to look at the situation objectively that clearly they've massively overcorrected and have switched to be dead-set against virtual unless they get dragged into it kicking and screaming.

The drama queen is back.

"Things" are not that bad and they are certainly not "way worse" than they've ever been. A few people are out with what amounts to a bad cold or the flu.

Cases are 5 times higher than they've ever been (probably worse because test positivity rates indicate we're missing tons of cases), hospitalizations are as high as they've ever been and climbing, and we're facing a variant which has been studied for less than 6 weeks, has had some dramatic changes in how it affects the body, and whose long-term effects we know almost nothing about. Not sure how people can possibly manage to be casual about this unless they're scientifically illiterate or deep in denial.

+1

So, you two know more than (checks notes) literally every credible scientist out there? Better than Fauci? Ashish Jha? Leana Wen, FFS? You two have determined that virtual, and all it comes with*, is better for kids than COVID?

*claiming it’s “just virtual” is disingenuous AF, and you know it

No legit scientist is dismissing covid/omicron as NBD. There are disagreements on how to weigh the importance of virtual vs in-person school, which is fair, but the folks who advocate for kids being in school are doing it because they believe that in-person school is important enough that it's worth the risks of covid (which, frankly, is not necessarily in their lane as a scientist, but it's fine, we all have opinions about this stuff.)

I can respect an argument that says "in person education is really really important, so kids should stay in person," even if I disagree. But I will call out people who try to make the argument that "omicron is mild/not worth worrying about/just like colds or flu" any day of the week-- that is misinformation and not supported by the science.

What about the American Academy of Pediatrics? Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia? Those and other credible scientific organizations were indeed calling for in-person learning as early as Fall 2020, but were roundly dismissed here because… why? People on this forum knew better? Among the people in whose scientific lane it absolutely is, there’s not a whole lot of debate that in-person schools are vital for healthy kids.

There’s plenty of evidence that for vaccinated people, which is the vast majority of MoCo, Omicron is milder than Delta. Not mild, but milder. That does change the calculus around open schools vs. not, at least if you buy into the theory that closing school is important to minimize COVID transmission (which there’s not much evidence to support).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I just can't wrap my mind around you people who would rather have your kid getting disorganized, asychronous "education" in a cafeteria while almost certainly being exposed to several other kids with the virus while they're in there. And you think this is better than having your kid get live virtual instruction for a week or two while safe at home? Can you explain it to me?

Simple, they don't want the responsibility.

DP, and no, it’s mostly two things. First, I have three elementary school kids and DH and I work full-time; between their ages and our schedules, “live virtual instruction” is stressful and worthless for them.

Second, I don’t trust for a second that virtual will be for a week or two. I literally cannot fathom how you (or anyone) can trust MCPS at this point to bring kids back in any kind of reasonable timeframe.

Third, I also don’t understand how people *still* do not get that plenty of kids are not “safe” at home. Not from COVID, not from being left unsupervised, etc. Are you that naive?

Huh? Are you kidding me? Given how despite bad things are-- way worse than they've ever been-- they're still resisting letting kids go virtual at all, it doesn't make sense to me that people are serious worrying that it's going to drag on forever. Is this just you guys having PTSD and learning the wrong lesson from their decisions last year? Because if what you learned is "MCPS loves virtual" rather than "MCPS is poorly managed and caters to the parents who put up the biggest fuss," you're not paying attention. It's obvious to anyone who's willing to look at the situation objectively that clearly they've massively overcorrected and have switched to be dead-set against virtual unless they get dragged into it kicking and screaming.

The drama queen is back.

"Things" are not that bad and they are certainly not "way worse" than they've ever been. A few people are out with what amounts to a bad cold or the flu.

Cases are 5 times higher than they've ever been (probably worse because test positivity rates indicate we're missing tons of cases), hospitalizations are as high as they've ever been and climbing, and we're facing a variant which has been studied for less than 6 weeks, has had some dramatic changes in how it affects the body, and whose long-term effects we know almost nothing about. Not sure how people can possibly manage to be casual about this unless they're scientifically illiterate or deep in denial.

+1

So, you two know more than (checks notes) literally every credible scientist out there? Better than Fauci? Ashish Jha? Leana Wen, FFS? You two have determined that virtual, and all it comes with*, is better for kids than COVID?

*claiming it’s “just virtual” is disingenuous AF, and you know it

No legit scientist is dismissing covid/omicron as NBD. There are disagreements on how to weigh the importance of virtual vs in-person school, which is fair, but the folks who advocate for kids being in school are doing it because they believe that in-person school is important enough that it's worth the risks of covid (which, frankly, is not necessarily in their lane as a scientist, but it's fine, we all have opinions about this stuff.)

I can respect an argument that says "in person education is really really important, so kids should stay in person," even if I disagree. But I will call out people who try to make the argument that "omicron is mild/not worth worrying about/just like colds or flu" any day of the week-- that is misinformation and not supported by the science.

I think the bigger problem is that the calculation of “worth the risks of COVID” is very different for every family. It’s beyond me how MCPS did not figure out how to conduct school so that people could go back and forth between in person and virtual for any reason at any time. There are many ways to handle this and they had a year plus to figure it out, but they chose to believe that we just need more time and the pandemic will end and we can keep teaching as normal. That is not going to happen. We will live forever with the threat of mutating viruses, not to mention climate emergency effects, etc.

The field of education has to adjust to the new normal and come up with new and effective ways to deliver education and any wrap around services in an environment where in person attendance is highly unstable.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I just can't wrap my mind around you people who would rather have your kid getting disorganized, asychronous "education" in a cafeteria while almost certainly being exposed to several other kids with the virus while they're in there. And you think this is better than having your kid get live virtual instruction for a week or two while safe at home? Can you explain it to me?

Simple, they don't want the responsibility.

DP, and no, it’s mostly two things. First, I have three elementary school kids and DH and I work full-time; between their ages and our schedules, “live virtual instruction” is stressful and worthless for them.

Second, I don’t trust for a second that virtual will be for a week or two. I literally cannot fathom how you (or anyone) can trust MCPS at this point to bring kids back in any kind of reasonable timeframe.

Third, I also don’t understand how people *still* do not get that plenty of kids are not “safe” at home. Not from COVID, not from being left unsupervised, etc. Are you that naive?

Huh? Are you kidding me? Given how despite bad things are-- way worse than they've ever been-- they're still resisting letting kids go virtual at all, it doesn't make sense to me that people are serious worrying that it's going to drag on forever. Is this just you guys having PTSD and learning the wrong lesson from their decisions last year? Because if what you learned is "MCPS loves virtual" rather than "MCPS is poorly managed and caters to the parents who put up the biggest fuss," you're not paying attention. It's obvious to anyone who's willing to look at the situation objectively that clearly they've massively overcorrected and have switched to be dead-set against virtual unless they get dragged into it kicking and screaming.

The drama queen is back.

"Things" are not that bad and they are certainly not "way worse" than they've ever been. A few people are out with what amounts to a bad cold or the flu.

Cases are 5 times higher than they've ever been (probably worse because test positivity rates indicate we're missing tons of cases), hospitalizations are as high as they've ever been and climbing, and we're facing a variant which has been studied for less than 6 weeks, has had some dramatic changes in how it affects the body, and whose long-term effects we know almost nothing about. Not sure how people can possibly manage to be casual about this unless they're scientifically illiterate or deep in denial.

+1

So, you two know more than (checks notes) literally every credible scientist out there? Better than Fauci? Ashish Jha? Leana Wen, FFS? You two have determined that virtual, and all it comes with*, is better for kids than COVID?

*claiming it’s “just virtual” is disingenuous AF, and you know it

No legit scientist is dismissing covid/omicron as NBD. There are disagreements on how to weigh the importance of virtual vs in-person school, which is fair, but the folks who advocate for kids being in school are doing it because they believe that in-person school is important enough that it's worth the risks of covid (which, frankly, is not necessarily in their lane as a scientist, but it's fine, we all have opinions about this stuff.)

I can respect an argument that says "in person education is really really important, so kids should stay in person," even if I disagree. But I will call out people who try to make the argument that "omicron is mild/not worth worrying about/just like colds or flu" any day of the week-- that is misinformation and not supported by the science.

I think the bigger problem is that the calculation of “worth the risks of COVID” is very different for every family. It’s beyond me how MCPS did not figure out how to conduct school so that people could go back and forth between in person and virtual for any reason at any time. There are many ways to handle this and they had a year plus to figure it out, but they chose to believe that we just need more time and the pandemic will end and we can keep teaching as normal. That is not going to happen. We will live forever with the threat of mutating viruses, not to mention climate emergency effects, etc.

The field of education has to adjust to the new normal and come up with new and effective ways to deliver education and any wrap around services in an environment where in person attendance is highly unstable.

Its beyond me that you call out MCPS for not figuring this out as though many other public schools districts have figured this out better, in the midst of a pandemic, ongoing teacher shortage, and now substitute shortage.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I just can't wrap my mind around you people who would rather have your kid getting disorganized, asychronous "education" in a cafeteria while almost certainly being exposed to several other kids with the virus while they're in there. And you think this is better than having your kid get live virtual instruction for a week or two while safe at home? Can you explain it to me?

Simple, they don't want the responsibility.

DP, and no, it’s mostly two things. First, I have three elementary school kids and DH and I work full-time; between their ages and our schedules, “live virtual instruction” is stressful and worthless for them.

Second, I don’t trust for a second that virtual will be for a week or two. I literally cannot fathom how you (or anyone) can trust MCPS at this point to bring kids back in any kind of reasonable timeframe.

Third, I also don’t understand how people *still* do not get that plenty of kids are not “safe” at home. Not from COVID, not from being left unsupervised, etc. Are you that naive?

all of this.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
The field of education has to adjust to the new normal and come up with new and effective ways to deliver education and any wrap around services in an environment where in person attendance is highly unstable.

What is needed is two models:

One for Grade K-3 (kids too young to legally be left home alone) allowing for in-school care as much as possible, with bus transportation provided; but also hybrid to allow parents to keep students home.

One for grades 4-12 fully virtual.

The problem is that this is quite unfair to teachers of Grades k-3 forcing them to take on risks that Grades 4-12 teachers don't need.

K-3 teachers need to be designated as Essential Workers -- different from Grade 4- 12 teachers. It should be part of the teacher license.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I just can't wrap my mind around you people who would rather have your kid getting disorganized, asychronous "education" in a cafeteria while almost certainly being exposed to several other kids with the virus while they're in there. And you think this is better than having your kid get live virtual instruction for a week or two while safe at home? Can you explain it to me?

Simple, they don't want the responsibility.

DP, and no, it’s mostly two things. First, I have three elementary school kids and DH and I work full-time; between their ages and our schedules, “live virtual instruction” is stressful and worthless for them.

Second, I don’t trust for a second that virtual will be for a week or two. I literally cannot fathom how you (or anyone) can trust MCPS at this point to bring kids back in any kind of reasonable timeframe.

Third, I also don’t understand how people *still* do not get that plenty of kids are not “safe” at home. Not from COVID, not from being left unsupervised, etc. Are you that naive?

Huh? Are you kidding me? Given how despite bad things are-- way worse than they've ever been-- they're still resisting letting kids go virtual at all, it doesn't make sense to me that people are serious worrying that it's going to drag on forever. Is this just you guys having PTSD and learning the wrong lesson from their decisions last year? Because if what you learned is "MCPS loves virtual" rather than "MCPS is poorly managed and caters to the parents who put up the biggest fuss," you're not paying attention. It's obvious to anyone who's willing to look at the situation objectively that clearly they've massively overcorrected and have switched to be dead-set against virtual unless they get dragged into it kicking and screaming.

The drama queen is back.

"Things" are not that bad and they are certainly not "way worse" than they've ever been. A few people are out with what amounts to a bad cold or the flu.

Cases are 5 times higher than they've ever been (probably worse because test positivity rates indicate we're missing tons of cases), hospitalizations are as high as they've ever been and climbing, and we're facing a variant which has been studied for less than 6 weeks, has had some dramatic changes in how it affects the body, and whose long-term effects we know almost nothing about. Not sure how people can possibly manage to be casual about this unless they're scientifically illiterate or deep in denial.

Honest question: do you just say these things (like 'hospitalizations ae as high as they've ever been) because you think they are true and don't bother to check? Or you know that they are false but just don't care.

But just in case you weren't aware: hospital bed utilization is at 75%, which is in the Low zone, per the MoCo health dashboard. It has been higher, going above 80% in both May of 2020 and April 2021.

So No. Hospitalizations are not as high as they've ever been.

The news on ICU beds is even better. Current utilization is at 75% as well, also in the Low zone. We peaked a year ago, at over 90%!. Again, not even close to "as high as they've ever been"

These facts matter.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I just can't wrap my mind around you people who would rather have your kid getting disorganized, asychronous "education" in a cafeteria while almost certainly being exposed to several other kids with the virus while they're in there. And you think this is better than having your kid get live virtual instruction for a week or two while safe at home? Can you explain it to me?

Simple, they don't want the responsibility.

DP, and no, it’s mostly two things. First, I have three elementary school kids and DH and I work full-time; between their ages and our schedules, “live virtual instruction” is stressful and worthless for them.

Second, I don’t trust for a second that virtual will be for a week or two. I literally cannot fathom how you (or anyone) can trust MCPS at this point to bring kids back in any kind of reasonable timeframe.

Third, I also don’t understand how people *still* do not get that plenty of kids are not “safe” at home. Not from COVID, not from being left unsupervised, etc. Are you that naive?

Huh? Are you kidding me? Given how despite bad things are-- way worse than they've ever been-- they're still resisting letting kids go virtual at all, it doesn't make sense to me that people are serious worrying that it's going to drag on forever. Is this just you guys having PTSD and learning the wrong lesson from their decisions last year? Because if what you learned is "MCPS loves virtual" rather than "MCPS is poorly managed and caters to the parents who put up the biggest fuss," you're not paying attention. It's obvious to anyone who's willing to look at the situation objectively that clearly they've massively overcorrected and have switched to be dead-set against virtual unless they get dragged into it kicking and screaming.

The bolded is hysterical. You do realize that MCPS was the last (or second to last) school district IN THE NATION to return to in classroom learning last year right? The only people that were catered to were entitled teachers.