LCPS is moving to 4 day a week 4/20

[Anonymous]

The issue in the elementary schools is that only a couple teachers per grade are in person. Once those in person classes are full, they are full. They are not going to move a DL teacher to hybrid at this late stage to accommodate mind-changers, especially since many (most) of the DL teachers have P1 status anyway.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

You just said it yourself, things have changed. Kids who signed up for 2 days a week get to change to 4 days a week but you think those kids who signed up for DL shouldn’t be able to make any changes? If you think it’s too late for changes, let’s just keep everyone with exactly what they signed up for, DL or 2 days hybrid. Let me guess, though, you’re not okay with that. Changes which benefit your child are okay .. everyone else can just suck it up... it’s all moot anyway because the LCPS teacher posted they will accommodate everyone. Your selfishness in implying DL kids shouldn’t be able to make changes because it could affect your kid being able to go 4 days is sad, though, and says a lot about who you are as a person...

If the DL are allowed in, then there might be so many, that they would not be able to do 4 days/week, and would have to switch to 2 days/week, which is what the DL opted out of.

If 40% are opting in, then this 40% should be able to go every day and fit within the smaller capacity.
If it is 5 days a week, many of the DL would opt in, thus making it impossible to do 4 days/week.

If they switch to 3 foot social distancing everyone can be accommodated.

Ashburn middle schools can probably take everyone who wants in, as right now Eagle Ridge is a ghost town, with just a few kids per class. My son was the only kid in his class most of the time, 5 kids in gym that is usually 50, and the teacher just let them play games on their chromebooks. Even lunch was 10 kids in a cafeteria that seats hundreds.

So where’s that equity they like to always bring about in every message and / or statement? Lol

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They should have done this to begin with. The logic of 2 days per week hybrid is because of the 6 feet social distancing, they now have classes at half capacity, so only half the students can come in. However, with half the students picking distance learning, then the other half should be able to come in all the time.
Before there was perhaps a limiting factor of only half the teachers were coming in, but they adjusted for that with assistants to monitor the class while the teacher teaches from home. With vaccinations, all teachers would be coming in, so they can accommodate the half who chose hybrid.
The other half they can accommodate if they drop six foot social distancing, which people are now acknowledging is not based on science.

Only half the teachers?? LMAO. Only 701 teachers in the entire county are on P1 work at home status. That’s it. All the rest of us are back.

That is the number we were given after the first survey, slightly higher than the student numbers. I haven't kept up to date. What is the current percentage?

One of the school board members said this like a month ago. It is 701. So many of you have blown P1 stay at home teachers up to this mammoth percentage - it’s not. And nobody got p2 (family members with health concerns) unless their school could personally swing it and admin okay’ed. But nobody got it from LCPS. So it’s 701 total.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They should have done this to begin with. The logic of 2 days per week hybrid is because of the 6 feet social distancing, they now have classes at half capacity, so only half the students can come in. However, with half the students picking distance learning, then the other half should be able to come in all the time.
Before there was perhaps a limiting factor of only half the teachers were coming in, but they adjusted for that with assistants to monitor the class while the teacher teaches from home. With vaccinations, all teachers would be coming in, so they can accommodate the half who chose hybrid.
The other half they can accommodate if they drop six foot social distancing, which people are now acknowledging is not based on science.

Only half the teachers?? LMAO. Only 701 teachers in the entire county are on P1 work at home status. That’s it. All the rest of us are back.

That is the number we were given after the first survey, slightly higher than the student numbers. I haven't kept up to date. What is the current percentage?

One of the school board members said this like a month ago. It is 701. So many of you have blown P1 stay at home teachers up to this mammoth percentage - it’s not. And nobody got p2 (family members with health concerns) unless their school could personally swing it and admin okay’ed. But nobody got it from LCPS. So it’s 701 total.

My number of half the teachers is from November or December or maybe earlier with the initial hybrid survey. 701 total is what percentage of teachers?

[Anonymous]

I guess we are just really unlucky because 4 of my DD’s teachers are teaching from home. I know for a fact one is caring for her parents, so definitely not P1.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I guess we are just really unlucky because 4 of my DD’s teachers are teaching from home. I know for a fact one is caring for her parents, so definitely not P1.

Then that means your school admin granted her P2 which meant they felt they had the coverage to do so. A friend of mine has P2 through her school because of her husbands asthma but it ends in April when he gets his second shot. Then she goes back in.

PP, you can google the total staff. Your number is when they surveyed us last summer and asked PREFERENCE. Half probably did say they preferred teaching at home then, we knew there was no plan for safety back in July. The number actually granted P1 is small. Go look up total staff and divide it by 701 if you demand specific percentages. You’re capable.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I guess we are just really unlucky because 4 of my DD’s teachers are teaching from home. I know for a fact one is caring for her parents, so definitely not P1.

Then that means your school admin granted her P2 which meant they felt they had the coverage to do so. A friend of mine has P2 through her school because of her husbands asthma but it ends in April when he gets his second shot. Then she goes back in.

PP, you can google the total staff. Your number is when they surveyed us last summer and asked PREFERENCE. Half probably did say they preferred teaching at home then, we knew there was no plan for safety back in July. The number actually granted P1 is small. Go look up total staff and divide it by 701 if you demand specific percentages. You’re capable.

Not sure what “coverage” means. Admin got a proctor like everyone else.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I guess we are just really unlucky because 4 of my DD’s teachers are teaching from home. I know for a fact one is caring for her parents, so definitely not P1.

Then that means your school admin granted her P2 which meant they felt they had the coverage to do so. A friend of mine has P2 through her school because of her husbands asthma but it ends in April when he gets his second shot. Then she goes back in.

PP, you can google the total staff. Your number is when they surveyed us last summer and asked PREFERENCE. Half probably did say they preferred teaching at home then, we knew there was no plan for safety back in July. The number actually granted P1 is small. Go look up total staff and divide it by 701 if you demand specific percentages. You’re capable.

Not sure what “coverage” means. Admin got a proctor like everyone else.

The proctor is coverage. Coverage means someone to cover supervising your class .

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I guess we are just really unlucky because 4 of my DD’s teachers are teaching from home. I know for a fact one is caring for her parents, so definitely not P1.

Then that means your school admin granted her P2 which meant they felt they had the coverage to do so. A friend of mine has P2 through her school because of her husbands asthma but it ends in April when he gets his second shot. Then she goes back in.

PP, you can google the total staff. Your number is when they surveyed us last summer and asked PREFERENCE. Half probably did say they preferred teaching at home then, we knew there was no plan for safety back in July. The number actually granted P1 is small. Go look up total staff and divide it by 701 if you demand specific percentages. You’re capable.

Not sure what “coverage” means. Admin got a proctor like everyone else.

The proctor is coverage. Coverage means someone to cover supervising your class .

Well by that definition any teacher can get “coverage.” If that’s the only criteria why make any teacher come in?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I guess we are just really unlucky because 4 of my DD’s teachers are teaching from home. I know for a fact one is caring for her parents, so definitely not P1.

Then that means your school admin granted her P2 which meant they felt they had the coverage to do so. A friend of mine has P2 through her school because of her husbands asthma but it ends in April when he gets his second shot. Then she goes back in.

PP, you can google the total staff. Your number is when they surveyed us last summer and asked PREFERENCE. Half probably did say they preferred teaching at home then, we knew there was no plan for safety back in July. The number actually granted P1 is small. Go look up total staff and divide it by 701 if you demand specific percentages. You’re capable.

Not sure what “coverage” means. Admin got a proctor like everyone else.

The proctor is coverage. Coverage means someone to cover supervising your class .

Well by that definition any teacher can get “coverage.” If that’s the only criteria why make any teacher come in?

I don’t even know what argument you’re trying to make anymore. Nearly all teachers did come in. The 700 who didn’t have legitimate health reasons that meant they were granted the accommodation to teach at home. There are proctors for THEM, not for all.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I guess we are just really unlucky because 4 of my DD’s teachers are teaching from home. I know for a fact one is caring for her parents, so definitely not P1.

Then that means your school admin granted her P2 which meant they felt they had the coverage to do so. A friend of mine has P2 through her school because of her husbands asthma but it ends in April when he gets his second shot. Then she goes back in.

PP, you can google the total staff. Your number is when they surveyed us last summer and asked PREFERENCE. Half probably did say they preferred teaching at home then, we knew there was no plan for safety back in July. The number actually granted P1 is small. Go look up total staff and divide it by 701 if you demand specific percentages. You’re capable.

Not sure what “coverage” means. Admin got a proctor like everyone else.

The proctor is coverage. Coverage means someone to cover supervising your class .

Well by that definition any teacher can get “coverage.” If that’s the only criteria why make any teacher come in?

I don’t even know what argument you’re trying to make anymore. Nearly all teachers did come in. The 700 who didn’t have legitimate health reasons that meant they were granted the accommodation to teach at home. There are proctors for THEM, not for all.

My point is - why did some teachers get P2 and some didn’t? It sounds like they were allowed to hire protons for P2, so why were some denied and others weren’t?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I guess we are just really unlucky because 4 of my DD’s teachers are teaching from home. I know for a fact one is caring for her parents, so definitely not P1.

Then that means your school admin granted her P2 which meant they felt they had the coverage to do so. A friend of mine has P2 through her school because of her husbands asthma but it ends in April when he gets his second shot. Then she goes back in.

PP, you can google the total staff. Your number is when they surveyed us last summer and asked PREFERENCE. Half probably did say they preferred teaching at home then, we knew there was no plan for safety back in July. The number actually granted P1 is small. Go look up total staff and divide it by 701 if you demand specific percentages. You’re capable.

Not sure what “coverage” means. Admin got a proctor like everyone else.

The proctor is coverage. Coverage means someone to cover supervising your class .

Well by that definition any teacher can get “coverage.” If that’s the only criteria why make any teacher come in?

I don’t even know what argument you’re trying to make anymore. Nearly all teachers did come in. The 700 who didn’t have legitimate health reasons that meant they were granted the accommodation to teach at home. There are proctors for THEM, not for all.

My point is - why did some teachers get P2 and some didn’t? It sounds like they were allowed to hire protons for P2, so why were some denied and others weren’t?

I already explained this. EVERYONE was denied P2 by the county. They couldn’t accommodate that many requests. If someone could provide documentation that otherwise would have gotten them P2 and *their individual school admin* could or would accommodate them, they could receive that accommodation either temporarily, until their at risk family member gets vaccinated, or through the year if needed and if the school admin could cover. Proctors can float. They might cover Ms Jones classes but during Ms Jones planning block, which the proctor doesn’t need to plan since they aren’t the instructor, they can be moved to cover another block during that time. So some schools can make it work for a few people but the district across the board could not.

[Anonymous]

So basically our principal is a pushover.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:So basically our principal is a pushover.

Well petty people like you might see it that way. In actuality though your principal is someone who values their staff and is thinking bigger picture. Accommodating a staff member who has a family member with a serious health concern if the school is able to is not only humane, it’s a way of promoting staff retention. No principal would want to see a good teacher have to take a leave of absence or leave the school entirely because they needed to stay home for their spouses health. Furthermore, the principal is thinking about YOUR kid and the teacher’s other students. If a principal can accommodate that teacher and doesn’t, that teacher might leave, meaning your kid and all those students now get subs for the last year quarter + a few weeks. Does that sound better to you?

Your kid was going to be taught online by this teacher 2 days a week no matter what. The other 2 days that your kid is in school that teacher is ONE block. Her teaching from home ultimately is way less disruptive to your kid than her leaving mid year because the principal wouldn’t accommodate her when he could.

[Anonymous]

We have 4 proctors. 3 on the same day. So spare me the lecture.