Fccps sending all students back 5 days a week on April 6th!!’

[Anonymous]

My son's hybrid class at TJ has just 6 kids in it. Assuming its somewhat an even split that's less than half.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:My son's hybrid class at TJ has just 6 kids in it. Assuming its somewhat an even split that's less than half.

My MD kid’s hybrid class is 5.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I just don’t understand how they do this and comply with CDC recommendations re distancing and case levels. I guess they are just ignoring that. Sure hope they don’t do this at the secondary level.

While it was not addressed specifically in today’s communication the superintendent has noted on multiple previous occasions that the FCCPS schools have the ability to bring all students back while retaining the 6 feet of separation “gold standard” with some creative use of space.

t

That’s what’s weird. FCCPS said it could bring kids back 5 days a week and keep 6’ distance in the fall. Then they inexplicably pulled back.

This announcement isn’t a rejection of the 6’ social distancing advice.

That means kids sitting on laptops and virtually logging on in the high school. The new building is huge but the classrooms are not. They must be planning on using all of the common areas.

Allegedly this is already the extent of what hybrid entails for most high school kids in the dmv, but I’m confident FCCPS could expand to full time learning and still do better.

Please offer ideas and suggestions on how it could be done better if all can’t fit in the classroom. A lot of the outdoor space isn’t usable with the current construction.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My son's hybrid class at TJ has just 6 kids in it. Assuming its somewhat an even split that's less than half.

My MD kid’s hybrid class is 5.

Wow, my MD kid has a hybrid class of 10. I wonder if that is more a factor of variations in the A-K/L-Z breakdowns or in the selection of hybrid/virtual for those specific classes. Those statistics seem pretty extreme though, given the significant majorities across the board that selected hybrid.

[Anonymous]

Any insights on how they will handle virtual learning once the in person kids are back full time? I’m really hoping they scrap the concurrent learning model and find a way to go back to the original plan of separate tracks, especially for the youngest learners.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My son's hybrid class at TJ has just 6 kids in it. Assuming its somewhat an even split that's less than half.

My MD kid’s hybrid class is 5.

Wow, my MD kid has a hybrid class of 10. I wonder if that is more a factor of variations in the A-K/L-Z breakdowns or in the selection of hybrid/virtual for those specific classes. Those statistics seem pretty extreme though, given the significant majorities across the board that selected hybrid.

I think it’s both how the alphabet split and the virtual selections.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:That sounds irresponsible. Way to put the kids and families health and safety at risk. Good luck with that. Great for other jurisdictions to see how it goes. Enjoy covid.

x1000

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I just don’t understand how they do this and comply with CDC recommendations re distancing and case levels. I guess they are just ignoring that. Sure hope they don’t do this at the secondary level.

While it was not addressed specifically in today’s communication the superintendent has noted on multiple previous occasions that the FCCPS schools have the ability to bring all students back while retaining the 6 feet of separation “gold standard” with some creative use of space.

t

That’s what’s weird. FCCPS said it could bring kids back 5 days a week and keep 6’ distance in the fall. Then they inexplicably pulled back.

This announcement isn’t a rejection of the 6’ social distancing advice.

Wasn't inexplicable. It was a teachers' revolt - they did not want to go back with all the kids in the building.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Any insights on how they will handle virtual learning once the in person kids are back full time? I’m really hoping they scrap the concurrent learning model and find a way to go back to the original plan of separate tracks, especially for the youngest learners.

I hope so too, but this seems unlikely for the last 2 months of school - switching kids' teachers would be pretty disruptive. I hope this is what they do for 2021-2022 though.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Is that what you got from reading Noonan’s latest update-in-search-of-an-editor? I saw where he committed to bringing back K-5 with a definite start date of April 6. But for MEH and (GM)HS, they are “engaging in thoughtful planning to bring back more students for more days after spring break.” That doesn’t sound definite to me.

Yeah I think some people are reading what they want to hear. K-5 should be back in full time April 6th. The older grades - hopefully within a few weeks after that, is how I read it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Is that what you got from reading Noonan’s latest update-in-search-of-an-editor? I saw where he committed to bringing back K-5 with a definite start date of April 6. But for MEH and (GM)HS, they are “engaging in thoughtful planning to bring back more students for more days after spring break.” That doesn’t sound definite to me.

Yeah I think some people are reading what they want to hear. K-5 should be back in full time April 6th. The older grades - hopefully within a few weeks after that, is how I read it.

Me too and I can live with it! The older kids create a higher risk and, on balance, older kids are managing better than younger kids in virtual. This development was unexpected and so welcome.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Sounds premature to me.

Sounds overdue to me.