Blended learning for long term medically impacted students

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I didn’t know MCPS was working on a solution. This looks really positive for families who were previously enrolled in MVA and cannot attend school due to medical needs. I especially like that parent supervision is required for children under 12 and recommended for over 12.

Most MVA kids didn't have medical needs. That's why the MVAers don't like the plan.

A good number did or their family members but some opted to be more involved, bullying or just learn better. Reasons don’t matter. Choice does.

There are private schools.

Some choices have costs.

Privates are for the privileged like you and that doesn't help with the virtual part. And, there is no true private that is equal to the MVA. The only few I found were $50k+ a year.

Choices have costs. Many parents paid tens of thousands of dollars for school when MCPS was closed. If you're unwilling or inable to pay for your choices, then you're left with what is being provided.

One has nothing to do with the other. MCPS was not closed, it was virtual. Big difference.

If you aren't satisfied with what the public system provides for free, you can pay for a program of your own choosing.

You do realize a lot of the MVA students did leave MCPS and MCPS will lose student revenue because of that. Since MVA education was cheaper than in person, that means your children don't benefit from the extra money spend on them that wasn't spend on the MVA students.

I saw Courtney's post, but I didn't see a source. Regardless, she made a false assumption that all revenue is per-pupil.

And no, MVA wasn't cheaper than in-person. The marginal cost of operating MVA was more than the marginal cost of serving those students in their usual placements.

In theory the per pupil allocation should go for that child but it obviously doesn't. However, yes, it is cheaper, no buses, no activities/sports in person, no physical buildings, etc. So, tell me how it would cost the same?

She claimed that by 295 kids leaving MCPS, MCPS lost $5.8M in revenue. That simply isn't true. Most revenue is not provided to MCPS on a per pupil basis.

MVA didn't allow MCPS to get rid of any buses, bus routes, activities, school buildings, or classroom teachers. It just added expenses to operate the MVA. It wasn't cheaper.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I didn’t know MCPS was working on a solution. This looks really positive for families who were previously enrolled in MVA and cannot attend school due to medical needs. I especially like that parent supervision is required for children under 12 and recommended for over 12.

Most MVA kids didn't have medical needs. That's why the MVAers don't like the plan.

Correct. Most MVA families wanted the option preserved for their choice or to continue to enable their children’s anxiety disorders.

Anxiety is an illness. If you can’t go do school in person due to your anxiety, this is a great option.

It’s an illness with many treatments options. Many kids who have anxiety successfully attend in-person and have been doing so for years.

Right, and many also got better treatment as they were in virtual, could get rid of the triggers and focus on their mental health. Many kids have NOT been successful in person. That is why they have so many meaningless mental health trainings for the kids and have social workers, counselors and therapists in the schools as parents no longer parent and expect the schools to do everything. If kids were managing so great, why is in person such a hot mess.

So, you think the kid that need an organ transplant would be better off in person? Kids with medical issues? Kids with mental health issues that struggled in person? Kids whose learning style works best with virtual and/or kids who need more support who aren't getting it in person where they can at home? How about kids with severe medical and other issues? Wheelchair-bound in a school without good access? Kids who rely on adults for their daily care, bathroom, etc? How about the kids who were forced back in person and don't have para's as promised?

The parents of the child that is on the transplant list are nuts. That poor kid should absolutely be in school. People in that situation end up waiting for an organ for a long time. It's pretty easy to tell when someone has end stage liver disease just by looking at them. He's not there. There's no way his MELD score is high enough that he's getting a cadaver organ anytime soon. His parents must be in denial, possibly from feeling guilty over being unwilling or unable to be living donors.

You sound nuts not to take something as serious as that seriously. You are also very cruel. You don't know what is going on and its none of your business. Yes, that child will wait a long time but if they are sick it can have serious consequences.

You're the one that brought that family up.

And I certainly take that situation seriously. I'm sure I have more experience with that than you. Actually, I have more experience with it than that family does.

No, you don't or you'd have far more empathy and concern. You don't know what's best for this child and its up to the parents and doctors, not some random selfish stranger.

There's no way his transplant hepatologist told his parents that he needs to stay home.

Did you listen to the testimony? They said he could not be exposed to colds/flu/covid. Its going around the schools now and many are sick or out sick. We had multiple teachers out sick this week. Our family got it too.

Illnesses at school? I'm shocked!

Obviously illnesses have always been going around at schools and workplaces. It has never been common for people with chronic conditions requiring an organ transplant to isolate for years as they wait on the list. The unfortunate, but consistent, pattern is that you're not likely to get an organ until your health deteriorates to the point where you can't do normal activities.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I didn’t know MCPS was working on a solution. This looks really positive for families who were previously enrolled in MVA and cannot attend school due to medical needs. I especially like that parent supervision is required for children under 12 and recommended for over 12.

Most MVA kids didn't have medical needs. That's why the MVAers don't like the plan.

A good number did or their family members but some opted to be more involved, bullying or just learn better. Reasons don’t matter. Choice does.

There are private schools.

Some choices have costs.

Privates are for the privileged like you and that doesn't help with the virtual part. And, there is no true private that is equal to the MVA. The only few I found were $50k+ a year.

Choices have costs. Many parents paid tens of thousands of dollars for school when MCPS was closed. If you're unwilling or inable to pay for your choices, then you're left with what is being provided.

One has nothing to do with the other. MCPS was not closed, it was virtual. Big difference.

If you aren't satisfied with what the public system provides for free, you can pay for a program of your own choosing.

You do realize a lot of the MVA students did leave MCPS and MCPS will lose student revenue because of that. Since MVA education was cheaper than in person, that means your children don't benefit from the extra money spend on them that wasn't spend on the MVA students.

I saw Courtney's post, but I didn't see a source. Regardless, she made a false assumption that all revenue is per-pupil.

And no, MVA wasn't cheaper than in-person. The marginal cost of operating MVA was more than the marginal cost of serving those students in their usual placements.

In theory the per pupil allocation should go for that child but it obviously doesn't. However, yes, it is cheaper, no buses, no activities/sports in person, no physical buildings, etc. So, tell me how it would cost the same?

She claimed that by 295 kids leaving MCPS, MCPS lost $5.8M in revenue. That simply isn't true. Most revenue is not provided to MCPS on a per pupil basis.

MVA didn't allow MCPS to get rid of any buses, bus routes, activities, school buildings, or classroom teachers. It just added expenses to operate the MVA. It wasn't cheaper.

State and federal funds are per student. You have no idea what you are talking about.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I didn’t know MCPS was working on a solution. This looks really positive for families who were previously enrolled in MVA and cannot attend school due to medical needs. I especially like that parent supervision is required for children under 12 and recommended for over 12.

Most MVA kids didn't have medical needs. That's why the MVAers don't like the plan.

Correct. Most MVA families wanted the option preserved for their choice or to continue to enable their children’s anxiety disorders.

Anxiety is an illness. If you can’t go do school in person due to your anxiety, this is a great option.

It’s an illness with many treatments options. Many kids who have anxiety successfully attend in-person and have been doing so for years.

Right, and many also got better treatment as they were in virtual, could get rid of the triggers and focus on their mental health. Many kids have NOT been successful in person. That is why they have so many meaningless mental health trainings for the kids and have social workers, counselors and therapists in the schools as parents no longer parent and expect the schools to do everything. If kids were managing so great, why is in person such a hot mess.

So, you think the kid that need an organ transplant would be better off in person? Kids with medical issues? Kids with mental health issues that struggled in person? Kids whose learning style works best with virtual and/or kids who need more support who aren't getting it in person where they can at home? How about kids with severe medical and other issues? Wheelchair-bound in a school without good access? Kids who rely on adults for their daily care, bathroom, etc? How about the kids who were forced back in person and don't have para's as promised?

The parents of the child that is on the transplant list are nuts. That poor kid should absolutely be in school. People in that situation end up waiting for an organ for a long time. It's pretty easy to tell when someone has end stage liver disease just by looking at them. He's not there. There's no way his MELD score is high enough that he's getting a cadaver organ anytime soon. His parents must be in denial, possibly from feeling guilty over being unwilling or unable to be living donors.

You sound nuts not to take something as serious as that seriously. You are also very cruel. You don't know what is going on and its none of your business. Yes, that child will wait a long time but if they are sick it can have serious consequences.

You're the one that brought that family up.

And I certainly take that situation seriously. I'm sure I have more experience with that than you. Actually, I have more experience with it than that family does.

No, you don't or you'd have far more empathy and concern. You don't know what's best for this child and its up to the parents and doctors, not some random selfish stranger.

There's no way his transplant hepatologist told his parents that he needs to stay home.

Did you listen to the testimony? They said he could not be exposed to colds/flu/covid. Its going around the schools now and many are sick or out sick. We had multiple teachers out sick this week. Our family got it too.

Illnesses at school? I'm shocked!

Obviously illnesses have always been going around at schools and workplaces. It has never been common for people with chronic conditions requiring an organ transplant to isolate for years as they wait on the list. The unfortunate, but consistent, pattern is that you're not likely to get an organ until your health deteriorates to the point where you can't do normal activities.

Stay blessed. Not everyone is as healthy as you.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I didn’t know MCPS was working on a solution. This looks really positive for families who were previously enrolled in MVA and cannot attend school due to medical needs. I especially like that parent supervision is required for children under 12 and recommended for over 12.

Most MVA kids didn't have medical needs. That's why the MVAers don't like the plan.

A good number did or their family members but some opted to be more involved, bullying or just learn better. Reasons don’t matter. Choice does.

There are private schools.

Some choices have costs.

Privates are for the privileged like you and that doesn't help with the virtual part. And, there is no true private that is equal to the MVA. The only few I found were $50k+ a year.

Choices have costs. Many parents paid tens of thousands of dollars for school when MCPS was closed. If you're unwilling or inable to pay for your choices, then you're left with what is being provided.

One has nothing to do with the other. MCPS was not closed, it was virtual. Big difference.

If you aren't satisfied with what the public system provides for free, you can pay for a program of your own choosing.

You do realize a lot of the MVA students did leave MCPS and MCPS will lose student revenue because of that. Since MVA education was cheaper than in person, that means your children don't benefit from the extra money spend on them that wasn't spend on the MVA students.

I saw Courtney's post, but I didn't see a source. Regardless, she made a false assumption that all revenue is per-pupil.

And no, MVA wasn't cheaper than in-person. The marginal cost of operating MVA was more than the marginal cost of serving those students in their usual placements.

In theory the per pupil allocation should go for that child but it obviously doesn't. However, yes, it is cheaper, no buses, no activities/sports in person, no physical buildings, etc. So, tell me how it would cost the same?

She claimed that by 295 kids leaving MCPS, MCPS lost $5.8M in revenue. That simply isn't true. Most revenue is not provided to MCPS on a per pupil basis.

MVA didn't allow MCPS to get rid of any buses, bus routes, activities, school buildings, or classroom teachers. It just added expenses to operate the MVA. It wasn't cheaper.

State and federal funds are per student. You have no idea what you are talking about.

Yes, but most revenue comes from the county, and isn't directly tied to enrollment numbers. Montgomery County doesn't limit itself to Maintainence of Effort.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I didn’t know MCPS was working on a solution. This looks really positive for families who were previously enrolled in MVA and cannot attend school due to medical needs. I especially like that parent supervision is required for children under 12 and recommended for over 12.

Most MVA kids didn't have medical needs. That's why the MVAers don't like the plan.

Correct. Most MVA families wanted the option preserved for their choice or to continue to enable their children’s anxiety disorders.

Anxiety is an illness. If you can’t go do school in person due to your anxiety, this is a great option.

It’s an illness with many treatments options. Many kids who have anxiety successfully attend in-person and have been doing so for years.

Right, and many also got better treatment as they were in virtual, could get rid of the triggers and focus on their mental health. Many kids have NOT been successful in person. That is why they have so many meaningless mental health trainings for the kids and have social workers, counselors and therapists in the schools as parents no longer parent and expect the schools to do everything. If kids were managing so great, why is in person such a hot mess.

So, you think the kid that need an organ transplant would be better off in person? Kids with medical issues? Kids with mental health issues that struggled in person? Kids whose learning style works best with virtual and/or kids who need more support who aren't getting it in person where they can at home? How about kids with severe medical and other issues? Wheelchair-bound in a school without good access? Kids who rely on adults for their daily care, bathroom, etc? How about the kids who were forced back in person and don't have para's as promised?

The parents of the child that is on the transplant list are nuts. That poor kid should absolutely be in school. People in that situation end up waiting for an organ for a long time. It's pretty easy to tell when someone has end stage liver disease just by looking at them. He's not there. There's no way his MELD score is high enough that he's getting a cadaver organ anytime soon. His parents must be in denial, possibly from feeling guilty over being unwilling or unable to be living donors.

You sound nuts not to take something as serious as that seriously. You are also very cruel. You don't know what is going on and its none of your business. Yes, that child will wait a long time but if they are sick it can have serious consequences.

You're the one that brought that family up.

And I certainly take that situation seriously. I'm sure I have more experience with that than you. Actually, I have more experience with it than that family does.

No, you don't or you'd have far more empathy and concern. You don't know what's best for this child and its up to the parents and doctors, not some random selfish stranger.

There's no way his transplant hepatologist told his parents that he needs to stay home.

Did you listen to the testimony? They said he could not be exposed to colds/flu/covid. Its going around the schools now and many are sick or out sick. We had multiple teachers out sick this week. Our family got it too.

Illnesses at school? I'm shocked!

Obviously illnesses have always been going around at schools and workplaces. It has never been common for people with chronic conditions requiring an organ transplant to isolate for years as they wait on the list. The unfortunate, but consistent, pattern is that you're not likely to get an organ until your health deteriorates to the point where you can't do normal activities.

Stay blessed. Not everyone is as healthy as you.

Have you gone through the organ transplant process? It doesn't sound like it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I didn’t know MCPS was working on a solution. This looks really positive for families who were previously enrolled in MVA and cannot attend school due to medical needs. I especially like that parent supervision is required for children under 12 and recommended for over 12.

Most MVA kids didn't have medical needs. That's why the MVAers don't like the plan.

A good number did or their family members but some opted to be more involved, bullying or just learn better. Reasons don’t matter. Choice does.

There are private schools.

Some choices have costs.

Privates are for the privileged like you and that doesn't help with the virtual part. And, there is no true private that is equal to the MVA. The only few I found were $50k+ a year.

Choices have costs. Many parents paid tens of thousands of dollars for school when MCPS was closed. If you're unwilling or inable to pay for your choices, then you're left with what is being provided.

One has nothing to do with the other. MCPS was not closed, it was virtual. Big difference.

If you aren't satisfied with what the public system provides for free, you can pay for a program of your own choosing.

You do realize a lot of the MVA students did leave MCPS and MCPS will lose student revenue because of that. Since MVA education was cheaper than in person, that means your children don't benefit from the extra money spend on them that wasn't spend on the MVA students.

I saw Courtney's post, but I didn't see a source. Regardless, she made a false assumption that all revenue is per-pupil.

And no, MVA wasn't cheaper than in-person. The marginal cost of operating MVA was more than the marginal cost of serving those students in their usual placements.

In theory the per pupil allocation should go for that child but it obviously doesn't. However, yes, it is cheaper, no buses, no activities/sports in person, no physical buildings, etc. So, tell me how it would cost the same?

She claimed that by 295 kids leaving MCPS, MCPS lost $5.8M in revenue. That simply isn't true. Most revenue is not provided to MCPS on a per pupil basis.

MVA didn't allow MCPS to get rid of any buses, bus routes, activities, school buildings, or classroom teachers. It just added expenses to operate the MVA. It wasn't cheaper.

+1 We know that MVA cost MCPS about $5m to run, without reducing any costs anywhere else since the number of "sending" students from each school was so small as to not make a difference. We also know that fewer than 285 families left the district entirely. As shared at one of the many meetings that were hijacked by MVA folks, that was the number who signaled in an informal poll that they might leave, but not the number that actually left the system.

But more importantly, the "per pupil spending" number is not the same as the amount that each student brings in by the sheer presence. That number is much lower.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I didn’t know MCPS was working on a solution. This looks really positive for families who were previously enrolled in MVA and cannot attend school due to medical needs. I especially like that parent supervision is required for children under 12 and recommended for over 12.

Most MVA kids didn't have medical needs. That's why the MVAers don't like the plan.

Correct. Most MVA families wanted the option preserved for their choice or to continue to enable their children’s anxiety disorders.

Anxiety is an illness. If you can’t go do school in person due to your anxiety, this is a great option.

It’s an illness with many treatments options. Many kids who have anxiety successfully attend in-person and have been doing so for years.

Right, and many also got better treatment as they were in virtual, could get rid of the triggers and focus on their mental health. Many kids have NOT been successful in person. That is why they have so many meaningless mental health trainings for the kids and have social workers, counselors and therapists in the schools as parents no longer parent and expect the schools to do everything. If kids were managing so great, why is in person such a hot mess.

So, you think the kid that need an organ transplant would be better off in person? Kids with medical issues? Kids with mental health issues that struggled in person? Kids whose learning style works best with virtual and/or kids who need more support who aren't getting it in person where they can at home? How about kids with severe medical and other issues? Wheelchair-bound in a school without good access? Kids who rely on adults for their daily care, bathroom, etc? How about the kids who were forced back in person and don't have para's as promised?

The parents of the child that is on the transplant list are nuts. That poor kid should absolutely be in school. People in that situation end up waiting for an organ for a long time. It's pretty easy to tell when someone has end stage liver disease just by looking at them. He's not there. There's no way his MELD score is high enough that he's getting a cadaver organ anytime soon. His parents must be in denial, possibly from feeling guilty over being unwilling or unable to be living donors.

You sound nuts not to take something as serious as that seriously. You are also very cruel. You don't know what is going on and its none of your business. Yes, that child will wait a long time but if they are sick it can have serious consequences.

You're the one that brought that family up.

And I certainly take that situation seriously. I'm sure I have more experience with that than you. Actually, I have more experience with it than that family does.

No, you don't or you'd have far more empathy and concern. You don't know what's best for this child and its up to the parents and doctors, not some random selfish stranger.

There's no way his transplant hepatologist told his parents that he needs to stay home.

Did you listen to the testimony? They said he could not be exposed to colds/flu/covid. Its going around the schools now and many are sick or out sick. We had multiple teachers out sick this week. Our family got it too.

Illnesses at school? I'm shocked!

Obviously illnesses have always been going around at schools and workplaces. It has never been common for people with chronic conditions requiring an organ transplant to isolate for years as they wait on the list. The unfortunate, but consistent, pattern is that you're not likely to get an organ until your health deteriorates to the point where you can't do normal activities.

I tend to agree with you, but maybe arguing with folks about their own childrens' perception of safety is not the way forward if we want to have a compassionate conversation.

For what it's worth, this blended learning model is what IIS should have been all along, and I think it neatly splits the baby between what MVA parents want (unlimited fully remote learning forever with no medical need required) and what actually makes sense (remote learning for those who qualify, as a reasonable accommodation).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I didn’t know MCPS was working on a solution. This looks really positive for families who were previously enrolled in MVA and cannot attend school due to medical needs. I especially like that parent supervision is required for children under 12 and recommended for over 12.

Most MVA kids didn't have medical needs. That's why the MVAers don't like the plan.

A good number did or their family members but some opted to be more involved, bullying or just learn better. Reasons don’t matter. Choice does.

There are private schools.

Some choices have costs.

Privates are for the privileged like you and that doesn't help with the virtual part. And, there is no true private that is equal to the MVA. The only few I found were $50k+ a year.

Choices have costs. Many parents paid tens of thousands of dollars for school when MCPS was closed. If you're unwilling or inable to pay for your choices, then you're left with what is being provided.

One has nothing to do with the other. MCPS was not closed, it was virtual. Big difference.

If you aren't satisfied with what the public system provides for free, you can pay for a program of your own choosing.

You do realize a lot of the MVA students did leave MCPS and MCPS will lose student revenue because of that. Since MVA education was cheaper than in person, that means your children don't benefit from the extra money spend on them that wasn't spend on the MVA students.

I saw Courtney's post, but I didn't see a source. Regardless, she made a false assumption that all revenue is per-pupil.

And no, MVA wasn't cheaper than in-person. The marginal cost of operating MVA was more than the marginal cost of serving those students in their usual placements.

In theory the per pupil allocation should go for that child but it obviously doesn't. However, yes, it is cheaper, no buses, no activities/sports in person, no physical buildings, etc. So, tell me how it would cost the same?

She claimed that by 295 kids leaving MCPS, MCPS lost $5.8M in revenue. That simply isn't true. Most revenue is not provided to MCPS on a per pupil basis.

MVA didn't allow MCPS to get rid of any buses, bus routes, activities, school buildings, or classroom teachers. It just added expenses to operate the MVA. It wasn't cheaper.

+1 We know that MVA cost MCPS about $5m to run, without reducing any costs anywhere else since the number of "sending" students from each school was so small as to not make a difference. We also know that fewer than 285 families left the district entirely. As shared at one of the many meetings that were hijacked by MVA folks, that was the number who signaled in an informal poll that they might leave, but not the number that actually left the system.

But more importantly, the "per pupil spending" number is not the same as the amount that each student brings in by the sheer presence. That number is much lower.

Is the source of that 295-students claim the online poll? I doubt the accuracy of that poll.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I didn’t know MCPS was working on a solution. This looks really positive for families who were previously enrolled in MVA and cannot attend school due to medical needs. I especially like that parent supervision is required for children under 12 and recommended for over 12.

Most MVA kids didn't have medical needs. That's why the MVAers don't like the plan.

Correct. Most MVA families wanted the option preserved for their choice or to continue to enable their children’s anxiety disorders.

Anxiety is an illness. If you can’t go do school in person due to your anxiety, this is a great option.

It’s an illness with many treatments options. Many kids who have anxiety successfully attend in-person and have been doing so for years.

Right, and many also got better treatment as they were in virtual, could get rid of the triggers and focus on their mental health. Many kids have NOT been successful in person. That is why they have so many meaningless mental health trainings for the kids and have social workers, counselors and therapists in the schools as parents no longer parent and expect the schools to do everything. If kids were managing so great, why is in person such a hot mess.

So, you think the kid that need an organ transplant would be better off in person? Kids with medical issues? Kids with mental health issues that struggled in person? Kids whose learning style works best with virtual and/or kids who need more support who aren't getting it in person where they can at home? How about kids with severe medical and other issues? Wheelchair-bound in a school without good access? Kids who rely on adults for their daily care, bathroom, etc? How about the kids who were forced back in person and don't have para's as promised?

The parents of the child that is on the transplant list are nuts. That poor kid should absolutely be in school. People in that situation end up waiting for an organ for a long time. It's pretty easy to tell when someone has end stage liver disease just by looking at them. He's not there. There's no way his MELD score is high enough that he's getting a cadaver organ anytime soon. His parents must be in denial, possibly from feeling guilty over being unwilling or unable to be living donors.

You sound nuts not to take something as serious as that seriously. You are also very cruel. You don't know what is going on and its none of your business. Yes, that child will wait a long time but if they are sick it can have serious consequences.

You're the one that brought that family up.

And I certainly take that situation seriously. I'm sure I have more experience with that than you. Actually, I have more experience with it than that family does.

No, you don't or you'd have far more empathy and concern. You don't know what's best for this child and its up to the parents and doctors, not some random selfish stranger.

There's no way his transplant hepatologist told his parents that he needs to stay home.

Did you listen to the testimony? They said he could not be exposed to colds/flu/covid. Its going around the schools now and many are sick or out sick. We had multiple teachers out sick this week. Our family got it too.

Illnesses at school? I'm shocked!

Obviously illnesses have always been going around at schools and workplaces. It has never been common for people with chronic conditions requiring an organ transplant to isolate for years as they wait on the list. The unfortunate, but consistent, pattern is that you're not likely to get an organ until your health deteriorates to the point where you can't do normal activities.

I tend to agree with you, but maybe arguing with folks about their own childrens' perception of safety is not the way forward if we want to have a compassionate conversation.

For what it's worth, this blended learning model is what IIS should have been all along, and I think it neatly splits the baby between what MVA parents want (unlimited fully remote learning forever with no medical need required) and what actually makes sense (remote learning for those who qualify, as a reasonable accommodation).

I mean, you're right, of course, but people keep pointing to that family as some wonderful example, apparently oblivious to the organ transplant process because they've never had to go through it before.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I didn’t know MCPS was working on a solution. This looks really positive for families who were previously enrolled in MVA and cannot attend school due to medical needs. I especially like that parent supervision is required for children under 12 and recommended for over 12.

Most MVA kids didn't have medical needs. That's why the MVAers don't like the plan.

A good number did or their family members but some opted to be more involved, bullying or just learn better. Reasons don’t matter. Choice does.

There are private schools.

Some choices have costs.

Privates are for the privileged like you and that doesn't help with the virtual part. And, there is no true private that is equal to the MVA. The only few I found were $50k+ a year.

Choices have costs. Many parents paid tens of thousands of dollars for school when MCPS was closed. If you're unwilling or inable to pay for your choices, then you're left with what is being provided.

One has nothing to do with the other. MCPS was not closed, it was virtual. Big difference.

If you aren't satisfied with what the public system provides for free, you can pay for a program of your own choosing.

You do realize a lot of the MVA students did leave MCPS and MCPS will lose student revenue because of that. Since MVA education was cheaper than in person, that means your children don't benefit from the extra money spend on them that wasn't spend on the MVA students.

I saw Courtney's post, but I didn't see a source. Regardless, she made a false assumption that all revenue is per-pupil.

And no, MVA wasn't cheaper than in-person. The marginal cost of operating MVA was more than the marginal cost of serving those students in their usual placements.

In theory the per pupil allocation should go for that child but it obviously doesn't. However, yes, it is cheaper, no buses, no activities/sports in person, no physical buildings, etc. So, tell me how it would cost the same?

She claimed that by 295 kids leaving MCPS, MCPS lost $5.8M in revenue. That simply isn't true. Most revenue is not provided to MCPS on a per pupil basis.

MVA didn't allow MCPS to get rid of any buses, bus routes, activities, school buildings, or classroom teachers. It just added expenses to operate the MVA. It wasn't cheaper.

+1 We know that MVA cost MCPS about $5m to run, without reducing any costs anywhere else since the number of "sending" students from each school was so small as to not make a difference. We also know that fewer than 285 families left the district entirely. As shared at one of the many meetings that were hijacked by MVA folks, that was the number who signaled in an informal poll that they might leave, but not the number that actually left the system.

But more importantly, the "per pupil spending" number is not the same as the amount that each student brings in by the sheer presence. That number is much lower.

Meetings were not highjacked. Parents have every right to be at those meetings and address their concerns. You must be mcps or a boe member trying to justify.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I didn’t know MCPS was working on a solution. This looks really positive for families who were previously enrolled in MVA and cannot attend school due to medical needs. I especially like that parent supervision is required for children under 12 and recommended for over 12.

Most MVA kids didn't have medical needs. That's why the MVAers don't like the plan.

A good number did or their family members but some opted to be more involved, bullying or just learn better. Reasons don’t matter. Choice does.

There are private schools.

Some choices have costs.

Privates are for the privileged like you and that doesn't help with the virtual part. And, there is no true private that is equal to the MVA. The only few I found were $50k+ a year.

Choices have costs. Many parents paid tens of thousands of dollars for school when MCPS was closed. If you're unwilling or inable to pay for your choices, then you're left with what is being provided.

One has nothing to do with the other. MCPS was not closed, it was virtual. Big difference.

If you aren't satisfied with what the public system provides for free, you can pay for a program of your own choosing.

You do realize a lot of the MVA students did leave MCPS and MCPS will lose student revenue because of that. Since MVA education was cheaper than in person, that means your children don't benefit from the extra money spend on them that wasn't spend on the MVA students.

I saw Courtney's post, but I didn't see a source. Regardless, she made a false assumption that all revenue is per-pupil.

And no, MVA wasn't cheaper than in-person. The marginal cost of operating MVA was more than the marginal cost of serving those students in their usual placements.

In theory the per pupil allocation should go for that child but it obviously doesn't. However, yes, it is cheaper, no buses, no activities/sports in person, no physical buildings, etc. So, tell me how it would cost the same?

She claimed that by 295 kids leaving MCPS, MCPS lost $5.8M in revenue. That simply isn't true. Most revenue is not provided to MCPS on a per pupil basis.

MVA didn't allow MCPS to get rid of any buses, bus routes, activities, school buildings, or classroom teachers. It just added expenses to operate the MVA. It wasn't cheaper.

+1 We know that MVA cost MCPS about $5m to run, without reducing any costs anywhere else since the number of "sending" students from each school was so small as to not make a difference. We also know that fewer than 285 families left the district entirely. As shared at one of the many meetings that were hijacked by MVA folks, that was the number who signaled in an informal poll that they might leave, but not the number that actually left the system.

But more importantly, the "per pupil spending" number is not the same as the amount that each student brings in by the sheer presence. That number is much lower.

Is the source of that 295-students claim the online poll? I doubt the accuracy of that poll.

No, data from mcps.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I didn’t know MCPS was working on a solution. This looks really positive for families who were previously enrolled in MVA and cannot attend school due to medical needs. I especially like that parent supervision is required for children under 12 and recommended for over 12.

Most MVA kids didn't have medical needs. That's why the MVAers don't like the plan.

Correct. Most MVA families wanted the option preserved for their choice or to continue to enable their children’s anxiety disorders.

Anxiety is an illness. If you can’t go do school in person due to your anxiety, this is a great option.

It’s an illness with many treatments options. Many kids who have anxiety successfully attend in-person and have been doing so for years.

Right, and many also got better treatment as they were in virtual, could get rid of the triggers and focus on their mental health. Many kids have NOT been successful in person. That is why they have so many meaningless mental health trainings for the kids and have social workers, counselors and therapists in the schools as parents no longer parent and expect the schools to do everything. If kids were managing so great, why is in person such a hot mess.

So, you think the kid that need an organ transplant would be better off in person? Kids with medical issues? Kids with mental health issues that struggled in person? Kids whose learning style works best with virtual and/or kids who need more support who aren't getting it in person where they can at home? How about kids with severe medical and other issues? Wheelchair-bound in a school without good access? Kids who rely on adults for their daily care, bathroom, etc? How about the kids who were forced back in person and don't have para's as promised?

The parents of the child that is on the transplant list are nuts. That poor kid should absolutely be in school. People in that situation end up waiting for an organ for a long time. It's pretty easy to tell when someone has end stage liver disease just by looking at them. He's not there. There's no way his MELD score is high enough that he's getting a cadaver organ anytime soon. His parents must be in denial, possibly from feeling guilty over being unwilling or unable to be living donors.

You sound nuts not to take something as serious as that seriously. You are also very cruel. You don't know what is going on and its none of your business. Yes, that child will wait a long time but if they are sick it can have serious consequences.

You're the one that brought that family up.

And I certainly take that situation seriously. I'm sure I have more experience with that than you. Actually, I have more experience with it than that family does.

No, you don't or you'd have far more empathy and concern. You don't know what's best for this child and its up to the parents and doctors, not some random selfish stranger.

There's no way his transplant hepatologist told his parents that he needs to stay home.

Did you listen to the testimony? They said he could not be exposed to colds/flu/covid. Its going around the schools now and many are sick or out sick. We had multiple teachers out sick this week. Our family got it too.

Illnesses at school? I'm shocked!

Obviously illnesses have always been going around at schools and workplaces. It has never been common for people with chronic conditions requiring an organ transplant to isolate for years as they wait on the list. The unfortunate, but consistent, pattern is that you're not likely to get an organ until your health deteriorates to the point where you can't do normal activities.

I tend to agree with you, but maybe arguing with folks about their own childrens' perception of safety is not the way forward if we want to have a compassionate conversation.

For what it's worth, this blended learning model is what IIS should have been all along, and I think it neatly splits the baby between what MVA parents want (unlimited fully remote learning forever with no medical need required) and what actually makes sense (remote learning for those who qualify, as a reasonable accommodation).

Every other county or state has virtual. The blended model is not ok. Did you read the paperwork?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I didn’t know MCPS was working on a solution. This looks really positive for families who were previously enrolled in MVA and cannot attend school due to medical needs. I especially like that parent supervision is required for children under 12 and recommended for over 12.

Most MVA kids didn't have medical needs. That's why the MVAers don't like the plan.

A good number did or their family members but some opted to be more involved, bullying or just learn better. Reasons don’t matter. Choice does.

There are private schools.

Some choices have costs.

Privates are for the privileged like you and that doesn't help with the virtual part. And, there is no true private that is equal to the MVA. The only few I found were $50k+ a year.

Choices have costs. Many parents paid tens of thousands of dollars for school when MCPS was closed. If you're unwilling or inable to pay for your choices, then you're left with what is being provided.

One has nothing to do with the other. MCPS was not closed, it was virtual. Big difference.

If you aren't satisfied with what the public system provides for free, you can pay for a program of your own choosing.

You do realize a lot of the MVA students did leave MCPS and MCPS will lose student revenue because of that. Since MVA education was cheaper than in person, that means your children don't benefit from the extra money spend on them that wasn't spend on the MVA students.

I saw Courtney's post, but I didn't see a source. Regardless, she made a false assumption that all revenue is per-pupil.

And no, MVA wasn't cheaper than in-person. The marginal cost of operating MVA was more than the marginal cost of serving those students in their usual placements.

In theory the per pupil allocation should go for that child but it obviously doesn't. However, yes, it is cheaper, no buses, no activities/sports in person, no physical buildings, etc. So, tell me how it would cost the same?

She claimed that by 295 kids leaving MCPS, MCPS lost $5.8M in revenue. That simply isn't true. Most revenue is not provided to MCPS on a per pupil basis.

MVA didn't allow MCPS to get rid of any buses, bus routes, activities, school buildings, or classroom teachers. It just added expenses to operate the MVA. It wasn't cheaper.

+1 We know that MVA cost MCPS about $5m to run, without reducing any costs anywhere else since the number of "sending" students from each school was so small as to not make a difference. We also know that fewer than 285 families left the district entirely. As shared at one of the many meetings that were hijacked by MVA folks, that was the number who signaled in an informal poll that they might leave, but not the number that actually left the system.

But more importantly, the "per pupil spending" number is not the same as the amount that each student brings in by the sheer presence. That number is much lower.

Is the source of that 295-students claim the online poll? I doubt the accuracy of that poll.

No, data from mcps.

Where's the source document?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I didn’t know MCPS was working on a solution. This looks really positive for families who were previously enrolled in MVA and cannot attend school due to medical needs. I especially like that parent supervision is required for children under 12 and recommended for over 12.

Most MVA kids didn't have medical needs. That's why the MVAers don't like the plan.

Correct. Most MVA families wanted the option preserved for their choice or to continue to enable their children’s anxiety disorders.

Anxiety is an illness. If you can’t go do school in person due to your anxiety, this is a great option.

It’s an illness with many treatments options. Many kids who have anxiety successfully attend in-person and have been doing so for years.

Right, and many also got better treatment as they were in virtual, could get rid of the triggers and focus on their mental health. Many kids have NOT been successful in person. That is why they have so many meaningless mental health trainings for the kids and have social workers, counselors and therapists in the schools as parents no longer parent and expect the schools to do everything. If kids were managing so great, why is in person such a hot mess.

So, you think the kid that need an organ transplant would be better off in person? Kids with medical issues? Kids with mental health issues that struggled in person? Kids whose learning style works best with virtual and/or kids who need more support who aren't getting it in person where they can at home? How about kids with severe medical and other issues? Wheelchair-bound in a school without good access? Kids who rely on adults for their daily care, bathroom, etc? How about the kids who were forced back in person and don't have para's as promised?

The parents of the child that is on the transplant list are nuts. That poor kid should absolutely be in school. People in that situation end up waiting for an organ for a long time. It's pretty easy to tell when someone has end stage liver disease just by looking at them. He's not there. There's no way his MELD score is high enough that he's getting a cadaver organ anytime soon. His parents must be in denial, possibly from feeling guilty over being unwilling or unable to be living donors.

You sound nuts not to take something as serious as that seriously. You are also very cruel. You don't know what is going on and its none of your business. Yes, that child will wait a long time but if they are sick it can have serious consequences.

You're the one that brought that family up.

And I certainly take that situation seriously. I'm sure I have more experience with that than you. Actually, I have more experience with it than that family does.

No, you don't or you'd have far more empathy and concern. You don't know what's best for this child and its up to the parents and doctors, not some random selfish stranger.

There's no way his transplant hepatologist told his parents that he needs to stay home.

Did you listen to the testimony? They said he could not be exposed to colds/flu/covid. Its going around the schools now and many are sick or out sick. We had multiple teachers out sick this week. Our family got it too.

Illnesses at school? I'm shocked!

Obviously illnesses have always been going around at schools and workplaces. It has never been common for people with chronic conditions requiring an organ transplant to isolate for years as they wait on the list. The unfortunate, but consistent, pattern is that you're not likely to get an organ until your health deteriorates to the point where you can't do normal activities.

I tend to agree with you, but maybe arguing with folks about their own childrens' perception of safety is not the way forward if we want to have a compassionate conversation.

For what it's worth, this blended learning model is what IIS should have been all along, and I think it neatly splits the baby between what MVA parents want (unlimited fully remote learning forever with no medical need required) and what actually makes sense (remote learning for those who qualify, as a reasonable accommodation).

Every other county or state has virtual. The blended model is not ok. Did you read the paperwork?

You think every other county and state has full-time, synchronous virtual instruction? No, they don't.