I don’t like the new concurrent plan (FCPS)

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Frankly, I don’t think the plan is going to be effective those two days at home....

That being said: why wasn’t this the plan we started with?

This wasn’t the plan from the beginning because anyone who is familiar with instructional practices knows it can’t be done effectively.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I disagree. I think of a teacher can handle 20-30 kids online she can definitely handle having a third of them with her in class at the same time. Smaller online cohort is easier, and she will have eyes on everyone else. Many other benefits. This is being done at other schools successfully, don’t believe the excuses.

Are you a teacher teaching online? Obviously not. If you listen to any of the teachers who are already doing this, they say it is an utter disaster. There is no way to be effective with both in person and online students at the same time. They are entirely different modalities. They only watt his would “work” is if instruction stayed in the online modality while kids were actually in the classroom, with small groups working with the teacher during rotations, but all direct instruction being online. But FCPS can’t do that because the bandwidth in buildings can’t sustain that many people on Meet or BBCU at once.

Everyone is going to be shortchanged by this.

The kids in class will not be logged on to BBCU. Just the teachers. And all of ours already teach from school most days anyway. There’s enough bandwidth for that. So that’s not an issue. Teachers will keep their same lesson plans, etc. They’ll just have kids at desks watching them do what they’re doing live now. They’ll be able to see kids raise their hands, use body language to communicate, and give some social support to kids that are desperate for it. You’re catastrophizing.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I disagree. I think of a teacher can handle 20-30 kids online she can definitely handle having a third of them with her in class at the same time. Smaller online cohort is easier, and she will have eyes on everyone else. Many other benefits. This is being done at other schools successfully, don’t believe the excuses.

Are you a teacher teaching online? Obviously not. If you listen to any of the teachers who are already doing this, they say it is an utter disaster. There is no way to be effective with both in person and online students at the same time. They are entirely different modalities. They only watt his would “work” is if instruction stayed in the online modality while kids were actually in the classroom, with small groups working with the teacher during rotations, but all direct instruction being online. But FCPS can’t do that because the bandwidth in buildings can’t sustain that many people on Meet or BBCU at once.

Everyone is going to be shortchanged by this.

Everyone is already being shortchanged.

Kahoot? That is not teaching. Sheesh.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I disagree. I think of a teacher can handle 20-30 kids online she can definitely handle having a third of them with her in class at the same time. Smaller online cohort is easier, and she will have eyes on everyone else. Many other benefits. This is being done at other schools successfully, don’t believe the excuses.

Are you a teacher teaching online? Obviously not. If you listen to any of the teachers who are already doing this, they say it is an utter disaster. There is no way to be effective with both in person and online students at the same time. They are entirely different modalities. They only watt his would “work” is if instruction stayed in the online modality while kids were actually in the classroom, with small groups working with the teacher during rotations, but all direct instruction being online. But FCPS can’t do that because the bandwidth in buildings can’t sustain that many people on Meet or BBCU at once.

Everyone is going to be shortchanged by this.

Everyone is already being shortchanged.

Kahoot? That is not teaching. Sheesh.

ST math three days a week instead of just one! Yay!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Frankly, I don’t think the plan is going to be effective those two days at home....

That being said: why wasn’t this the plan we started with?

This wasn’t the plan from the beginning because anyone who is familiar with instructional practices knows it can’t be done effectively.

The same is true for 100% DL.

[Anonymous]

I cannot understand why they didn’t have teacher team teach- the one who prefers DL does the distance learning on the days the hybrid are home and another teacher stays in person to do hybrid only.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Frankly, I don’t think the plan is going to be effective those two days at home....

That being said: why wasn’t this the plan we started with?

I suggested this months ago and was told multiple times it wasn't possible due to technology constraints.

We don’t have the technology yo do this well. We don’t have mounted cameras in classrooms, bandwidth for everyone to be videoconferencing, microphones for teachers...we don’t even have document cameras in most classrooms. Teachers are going to have to position themselves so they can be seen by their laptop’s built in camera while trying to project through a mask to be heard online as well as in person. How to keep the online kids engaged while you provide meaningful interactions in person? You can’t. It’s nuts. We knew it was a horrible decision from the beginning. This sudden shift in approach is a huge mistake.

[Anonymous]

Concurrent, even with its limitations, will certainly give better educational outcomes than having kids home three days a week without any direct instruction at all. No brainer.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Frankly, I don’t think the plan is going to be effective those two days at home....

That being said: why wasn’t this the plan we started with?

I suggested this months ago and was told multiple times it wasn't possible due to technology constraints.

We don’t have the technology yo do this well. We don’t have mounted cameras in classrooms, bandwidth for everyone to be videoconferencing, microphones for teachers...we don’t even have document cameras in most classrooms. Teachers are going to have to position themselves so they can be seen by their laptop’s built in camera while trying to project through a mask to be heard online as well as in person. How to keep the online kids engaged while you provide meaningful interactions in person? You can’t. It’s nuts. We knew it was a horrible decision from the beginning. This sudden shift in approach is a huge mistake.

You are way overthinking this. Sit at your desk, deliver the class like you have been. There will be a Bluetooth speaker and mics. We don’t need a view of the classroom at home, we need what you’ve been doing which is slides and audio. Ocassionally you show your face.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I cannot understand why they didn’t have teacher team teach- the one who prefers DL does the distance learning on the days the hybrid are home and another teacher stays in person to do hybrid only.

Lol, think that through a little more.

[Anonymous]

It’s not perfect, but it is possible. And most importantly, it’s a necessary step and the only path forward. Otherwise we’re stuck in 100% DL for the year, if not longer (and at this point, I do think it’ll be longer because everything is just so broken). If DL is working for you, fantastic. Stick with it. For those it is not working for, we need another option. And this is it, folks.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It’s not perfect, but it is possible. And most importantly, it’s a necessary step and the only path forward. Otherwise we’re stuck in 100% DL for the year, if not longer (and at this point, I do think it’ll be longer because everything is just so broken). If DL is working for you, fantastic. Stick with it. For those it is not working for, we need another option. And this is it, folks.

I’m sticking with DL and I’m like, take the damn deal people! Are you nuts?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Concurrent, even with its limitations, will certainly give better educational outcomes than having kids home three days a week without any direct instruction at all. No brainer.

Not for those that aren’t getting anything out of DL as it is.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Concurrent, even with its limitations, will certainly give better educational outcomes than having kids home three days a week without any direct instruction at all. No brainer.

Not for those that aren’t getting anything out of DL as it is.

Yes..... because now you get two days of school!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It’s not perfect, but it is possible. And most importantly, it’s a necessary step and the only path forward. Otherwise we’re stuck in 100% DL for the year, if not longer (and at this point, I do think it’ll be longer because everything is just so broken). If DL is working for you, fantastic. Stick with it. For those it is not working for, we need another option. And this is it, folks.

I’m sticking with DL and I’m like, take the damn deal people! Are you nuts?

PP here- Am I nuts? No, I’m 100% for it because it’s all we got! It’s not perfect, but nothing is right now.