BOE reconsidering the Virtual Academy, Leader in Me, and Innovative School Year Calendar

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Wait they are thinking of bringing Leader in Me back?!

No, they're thinking of getting rid of it altogether. (Some schools still have it.)

Well, that is a good thing. They should get rid of that trash. I didn't realize some schools still have it.

You're being generous. Trash isn't actively harmful like Virtual Academy has shown to be.

How is the Virtual Academy actively harmful?

I would think it would be tremendously valuable for students who are homebound for extended periods. If a child’s medical condition keeps them from attending school for a while, we shouldn’t expect the family to have to homeschool on top of everything else.

It seems like it provides useful differention to some students as PPs have described.

If it is somehow harmful, can the content be modified while maintaining the flexibility the format offers?

Students that are unable to attend school are generally going to be unable to consistently participate in virtual school for hours each day. That's why there's IIS.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:How is the Virtual Academy actively harmful?

I would think it would be tremendously valuable for students who are homebound for extended periods. If a child’s medical condition keeps them from attending school for a while, we shouldn’t expect the family to have to homeschool on top of everything else.

MCPS has the Interim Instructional Academy for this. It can be wasteful to double up on services.

[Anonymous]

PP again, it's IIS Interim Instructional Services.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The resident virtual school lover must be losing her mind over the prospect of letting her kids leave her sight.

There's always homeschool!

Grow up and realize getting rid of VA just keeps MCPS back in the past while the rest of the world moves forward. Virtual options are available at districts all over the country.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The resident virtual school lover must be losing her mind over the prospect of letting her kids leave her sight.

There's always homeschool!

Grow up and realize getting rid of VA just keeps MCPS back in the past while the rest of the world moves forward. Virtual options are available at districts all over the country.

This… it’s embarrassing that MoCo parents refuse to evolve because they are still angry about 2020.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:VA must go, we need the teachers back in buildings not with virtual classes with 7 or 8 kids, there's a shortage

You don’t know what you’re talking about in regards to numbers. Let people who actually do know, handle it. Your uneducated two cents are unnecessary.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:PP again, it's IIS Interim Instructional Services.

That is not even close to being a proper education. IIS only has the core courses that meet for 1.5 hours a week each. That’s 6 hours a week. It’s for extremely fragile children that just need to keep a line of learning open. No homework; no tests; no quizzes; no real work. The VA is a tremendous benefit to those who can handle a full course load but may need the flexibility of being at home for a variety of reasons. Many kids are thriving there. Don’t throw “data” back. A child’s needs go deeper than a number. No one is harmed by it being open. It’s just one more program in MCPS; it’s just controversial because some people choose not to keep an open mind.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Wait they are thinking of bringing Leader in Me back?!

No, they're thinking of getting rid of it altogether. (Some schools still have it.)

Well, that is a good thing. They should get rid of that trash. I didn't realize some schools still have it.

You're being generous. Trash isn't actively harmful like Virtual Academy has shown to be.

How is the Virtual Academy actively harmful?

I would think it would be tremendously valuable for students who are homebound for extended periods. If a child’s medical condition keeps them from attending school for a while, we shouldn’t expect the family to have to homeschool on top of everything else.

It seems like it provides useful differention to some students as PPs have described.

If it is somehow harmful, can the content be modified while maintaining the flexibility the format offers?

It's harmful the same way a charter school is harmful. It pulls money away from everything else.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:PP again, it's IIS Interim Instructional Services.

That is not even close to being a proper education. IIS only has the core courses that meet for 1.5 hours a week each. That’s 6 hours a week. It’s for extremely fragile children that just need to keep a line of learning open. No homework; no tests; no quizzes; no real work. The VA is a tremendous benefit to those who can handle a full course load but may need the flexibility of being at home for a variety of reasons. Many kids are thriving there. Don’t throw “data” back. A child’s needs go deeper than a number. No one is harmed by it being open. It’s just one more program in MCPS; it’s just controversial because some people choose not to keep an open mind.

That's great but pay for it yourself. You did not have it before 2020 right?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Wait they are thinking of bringing Leader in Me back?!

No, they're thinking of getting rid of it altogether. (Some schools still have it.)

Well, that is a good thing. They should get rid of that trash. I didn't realize some schools still have it.

You're being generous. Trash isn't actively harmful like Virtual Academy has shown to be.

How is the Virtual Academy actively harmful?

I would think it would be tremendously valuable for students who are homebound for extended periods. If a child’s medical condition keeps them from attending school for a while, we shouldn’t expect the family to have to homeschool on top of everything else.

It seems like it provides useful differention to some students as PPs have described.

If it is somehow harmful, can the content be modified while maintaining the flexibility the format offers?

It's harmful the same way a charter school is harmful. It pulls money away from everything else.

m

Ok. Show us the money big mouth

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:PP again, it's IIS Interim Instructional Services.

That is not even close to being a proper education. IIS only has the core courses that meet for 1.5 hours a week each. That’s 6 hours a week. It’s for extremely fragile children that just need to keep a line of learning open. No homework; no tests; no quizzes; no real work. The VA is a tremendous benefit to those who can handle a full course load but may need the flexibility of being at home for a variety of reasons. Many kids are thriving there. Don’t throw “data” back. A child’s needs go deeper than a number. No one is harmed by it being open. It’s just one more program in MCPS; it’s just controversial because some people choose not to keep an open mind.

That's great but pay for it yourself. You did not have it before 2020 right?

Shhh. Let the adults talk please.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Virtual Academy should not be using money in the budget. If you don't want your kids in school pay for home schooling yourself. Such an obvious solution.

One could say the same thing about in person. The in-person schools are getting funding for the MVA students so the simple solution is to pull that funding and give it to the MVA. They shouldn't be getting money for kids not in the schools.

If we made that the rule, then we could cut funding for Kennedy in half.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Virtual Academy should not be using money in the budget. If you don't want your kids in school pay for home schooling yourself. Such an obvious solution.

One could say the same thing about in person. The in-person schools are getting funding for the MVA students so the simple solution is to pull that funding and give it to the MVA. They shouldn't be getting money for kids not in the schools.

If we made that the rule, then we could cut funding for Kennedy in half.

Lol! Seriously! With all the skipping last year we could probably pull all that $$$ from those schools and pay off the deficit.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Wait they are thinking of bringing Leader in Me back?!

No, they're thinking of getting rid of it altogether. (Some schools still have it.)

Well, that is a good thing. They should get rid of that trash. I didn't realize some schools still have it.

You're being generous. Trash isn't actively harmful like Virtual Academy has shown to be.

How is the Virtual Academy actively harmful?

I would think it would be tremendously valuable for students who are homebound for extended periods. If a child’s medical condition keeps them from attending school for a while, we shouldn’t expect the family to have to homeschool on top of everything else.

It seems like it provides useful differention to some students as PPs have described.

If it is somehow harmful, can the content be modified while maintaining the flexibility the format offers?

Students that are unable to attend school are generally going to be unable to consistently participate in virtual school for hours each day. That's why there's IIS.

Its sad you don't understand how different the programs are.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Wait they are thinking of bringing Leader in Me back?!

No, they're thinking of getting rid of it altogether. (Some schools still have it.)

Well, that is a good thing. They should get rid of that trash. I didn't realize some schools still have it.

You're being generous. Trash isn't actively harmful like Virtual Academy has shown to be.

How is the Virtual Academy actively harmful?

I would think it would be tremendously valuable for students who are homebound for extended periods. If a child’s medical condition keeps them from attending school for a while, we shouldn’t expect the family to have to homeschool on top of everything else.

It seems like it provides useful differention to some students as PPs have described.

If it is somehow harmful, can the content be modified while maintaining the flexibility the format offers?

It's harmful the same way a charter school is harmful. It pulls money away from everything else.

Right now the school is getting the funding for a virtual student and not providing any services. Almost all of the schools are overcrowded so this reduces overcrowding and the funding loss to each school would be minimal if they stop paying that school for the slot.

And, maybe if the schools were better able to meet all students needs, there wouldn't be a need for virtual for some families but that isn't the case.