Why do so many parents want DL forever?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They don't want their kids exposed to "those kids," which has been openly expressed many times on DCUM over the past year by pro-DL parents. The definition of "those kids" varies but it typically is code for brown children, children with disabilities, poorer children, etc.

We all know what the posters who talk about how "my kids are thriving because they aren't exposed to those kids" are really saying. Sometimes they are so overtly racist/ableist/etc that people report them to the moderator and those posts are deleted. I've personally seen and reported enough of them that I know what the other posters who are more subtle are saying when they talk about "those kids."

I think they are a large percentage of the DL forever crowd.

Wow. I never thought of it that way.

Every thread about DL, returning to school, or the idea of long term DL has posters saying that their kids are "thriving" because they don't have to deal with the "troublemakers" or special needs kids and can concentrate on their own learning. That's the most frequently stated reason why posters say their kids are learning more with DL than in person.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They don't want their kids exposed to "those kids," which has been openly expressed many times on DCUM over the past year by pro-DL parents. The definition of "those kids" varies but it typically is code for brown children, children with disabilities, poorer children, etc.

We all know what the posters who talk about how "my kids are thriving because they aren't exposed to those kids" are really saying. Sometimes they are so overtly racist/ableist/etc that people report them to the moderator and those posts are deleted. I've personally seen and reported enough of them that I know what the other posters who are more subtle are saying when they talk about "those kids."

I think they are a large percentage of the DL forever crowd.

Wow. I never thought of it that way.

Every thread about DL, returning to school, or the idea of long term DL has posters saying that their kids are "thriving" because they don't have to deal with the "troublemakers" or special needs kids and can concentrate on their own learning. That's the most frequently stated reason why posters say their kids are learning more with DL than in person.

+1

Exactly. They often don't even try to hide their racism, ableism, etc.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They don't want their kids exposed to "those kids," which has been openly expressed many times on DCUM over the past year by pro-DL parents. The definition of "those kids" varies but it typically is code for brown children, children with disabilities, poorer children, etc.

We all know what the posters who talk about how "my kids are thriving because they aren't exposed to those kids" are really saying. Sometimes they are so overtly racist/ableist/etc that people report them to the moderator and those posts are deleted. I've personally seen and reported enough of them that I know what the other posters who are more subtle are saying when they talk about "those kids."

I think they are a large percentage of the DL forever crowd.

Wow. I never thought of it that way.

Every thread about DL, returning to school, or the idea of long term DL has posters saying that their kids are "thriving" because they don't have to deal with the "troublemakers" or special needs kids and can concentrate on their own learning. That's the most frequently stated reason why posters say their kids are learning more with DL than in person.

+1

Exactly. They often don't even try to hide their racism, ableism, etc.

Then they can pay $$ to go to private school with a perfect selection of students.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They don't want their kids exposed to "those kids," which has been openly expressed many times on DCUM over the past year by pro-DL parents. The definition of "those kids" varies but it typically is code for brown children, children with disabilities, poorer children, etc.

We all know what the posters who talk about how "my kids are thriving because they aren't exposed to those kids" are really saying. Sometimes they are so overtly racist/ableist/etc that people report them to the moderator and those posts are deleted. I've personally seen and reported enough of them that I know what the other posters who are more subtle are saying when they talk about "those kids."

I think they are a large percentage of the DL forever crowd.

Wow. I never thought of it that way.

Every thread about DL, returning to school, or the idea of long term DL has posters saying that their kids are "thriving" because they don't have to deal with the "troublemakers" or special needs kids and can concentrate on their own learning. That's the most frequently stated reason why posters say their kids are learning more with DL than in person.

+1

Exactly. They often don't even try to hide their racism, ableism, etc.

Even on the AAP forum they openly say they don’t want Mondays because they want nothing to do with the Gen Ed bottomless pit”.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:A lot of MS/HS kids like it because they don’t have to get up early, deal with school bullies/social situations, they can stay at home and be comfortable, and their parents are fine with it as long as they keep their grades up. It’s mostly secondary issues apart from virus related concerns.

Exactly. More time for carjackings.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It’s still not safe for kids, especially with the new strains. And I’m assuming people being who have opted to continue virtual learning have found a way to make it work for them. Why does it matter to you? I believe virtual learning should permanently become an option as long as there are dedicated virtual learning teachers at each school so that no one has to teach concurrently.

No to the bolded.

I could understand a dedicated virtual pyramid in large districts, but if a family chooses virtual they don't get to monopolize resources at the school level. They can go to their base school for extracurriculars, but there shouldn't be a tie between virtual and individual schools.

+10000

No way should already scarce resources be forced to accommodate those who simply prefer to "learn from home."

I don't even think that anyone who wants DL for non-medical reasons should be able to go to their base school for activities. When you are part of a community, you take the good and the bad. If you want DL for your own convenience or to travel, you make your own activity schedule. That's the way it is for dual enrollment in our county. If you don't have any classes at school, you can't participate in activities.

Completely agree, and I think this also applies to traditional homeschoolers.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They don't want their kids exposed to "those kids," which has been openly expressed many times on DCUM over the past year by pro-DL parents. The definition of "those kids" varies but it typically is code for brown children, children with disabilities, poorer children, etc.

We all know what the posters who talk about how "my kids are thriving because they aren't exposed to those kids" are really saying. Sometimes they are so overtly racist/ableist/etc that people report them to the moderator and those posts are deleted. I've personally seen and reported enough of them that I know what the other posters who are more subtle are saying when they talk about "those kids."

I think they are a large percentage of the DL forever crowd.

Amen. That's why I am torn about the idea of virtual academies for anyone who wants to continue with DL.

I strongly, STRONGLY disagree with the idea of virtual academies supported by public funds. It is a way of diverting public funds to enforce a new generation of highly segregated schools.

Exactly. Not to mention a generation of fat, lazy, socially-maladjusted kids who will grow up believing that life can simply exist forever from their bedrooms.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They don't want their kids exposed to "those kids," which has been openly expressed many times on DCUM over the past year by pro-DL parents. The definition of "those kids" varies but it typically is code for brown children, children with disabilities, poorer children, etc.

We all know what the posters who talk about how "my kids are thriving because they aren't exposed to those kids" are really saying. Sometimes they are so overtly racist/ableist/etc that people report them to the moderator and those posts are deleted. I've personally seen and reported enough of them that I know what the other posters who are more subtle are saying when they talk about "those kids."

I think they are a large percentage of the DL forever crowd.

Wow. I never thought of it that way.

Every thread about DL, returning to school, or the idea of long term DL has posters saying that their kids are "thriving" because they don't have to deal with the "troublemakers" or special needs kids and can concentrate on their own learning. That's the most frequently stated reason why posters say their kids are learning more with DL than in person.

+1

Exactly. They often don't even try to hide their racism, ableism, etc.

Then they can pay $$ to go to private school with a perfect selection of students.

I agree. I think there will be a spate of private virtual academies start. They can go there. I don't want their neo-segregationist beliefs anywhere near public funding.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A lot of MS/HS kids like it because they don’t have to get up early, deal with school bullies/social situations, they can stay at home and be comfortable, and their parents are fine with it as long as they keep their grades up. It’s mostly secondary issues apart from virus related concerns.

In other words, they've become lazy and their childish parents accommodate it.

It’s definitely concerning and will start to affect all of us in the long term. A kid could do all of HS and feasibly all of college remotely, depending on their major - or could do many classes remotely and some labs in person. They could get a remote job. Spend most of their days isolated from others even into adulthood. It’s comfortable for many people, but is it physically and mentally healthy? I don’t know that it is.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Notice how they say START with the vaccine? What else could they possibly demand beyond a vaccine in the name of safety? I am honestly asking this question.

I honestly wonder that too. With adults as well as children. There’s so many vocal people who say they don’t “feel safe” even with the vaccine. Well what else are we supposed to do? The vaccine IS the end game. Masks and distancing are just stopgap measures.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Notice how they say START with the vaccine? What else could they possibly demand beyond a vaccine in the name of safety? I am honestly asking this question.

I honestly wonder that too. With adults as well as children. There’s so many vocal people who say they don’t “feel safe” even with the vaccine. Well what else are we supposed to do? The vaccine IS the end game. Masks and distancing are just stopgap measures.

I'm not that PP, but honestly, I think the next phase of the pandemic is going to be all of the people who have had the tremendous privilege of isolating at home this whole time come to terms with what level of risk they're comfortable with. For some, once they themselves are vaccinated, they will do whatever they want to/are permitted to do (eat in restaurants, travel, etc). For others, the anxiety over doing even the smallest activity will be a huge hurdle. I have had people tell me they cannot imagine walking back into a grocery store or getting a haircut. This is going to take a lot of time. And of course, there are tons of people who have not been able to shield themselves to that level so may feel more comfortable with the levels of mitigation being taken in schools, even when kids aren't vaccinated.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Notice how they say START with the vaccine? What else could they possibly demand beyond a vaccine in the name of safety? I am honestly asking this question.

I honestly wonder that too. With adults as well as children. There’s so many vocal people who say they don’t “feel safe” even with the vaccine. Well what else are we supposed to do? The vaccine IS the end game. Masks and distancing are just stopgap measures.

I'm not that PP, but honestly, I think the next phase of the pandemic is going to be all of the people who have had the tremendous privilege of isolating at home this whole time come to terms with what level of risk they're comfortable with. For some, once they themselves are vaccinated, they will do whatever they want to/are permitted to do (eat in restaurants, travel, etc). For others, the anxiety over doing even the smallest activity will be a huge hurdle. I have had people tell me they cannot imagine walking back into a grocery store or getting a haircut. This is going to take a lot of time. And of course, there are tons of people who have not been able to shield themselves to that level so may feel more comfortable with the levels of mitigation being taken in schools, even when kids aren't vaccinated.

Oh good gravy. I'm plenty privileged, but I still had to go into the office starting in April. Layered mitigation really does work, as the majority of America that has stepped outside their houses knows.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Notice how they say START with the vaccine? What else could they possibly demand beyond a vaccine in the name of safety? I am honestly asking this question.

I honestly wonder that too. With adults as well as children. There’s so many vocal people who say they don’t “feel safe” even with the vaccine. Well what else are we supposed to do? The vaccine IS the end game. Masks and distancing are just stopgap measures.

X1000

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Notice how they say START with the vaccine? What else could they possibly demand beyond a vaccine in the name of safety? I am honestly asking this question.

I honestly wonder that too. With adults as well as children. There’s so many vocal people who say they don’t “feel safe” even with the vaccine. Well what else are we supposed to do? The vaccine IS the end game. Masks and distancing are just stopgap measures.

I'm not that PP, but honestly, I think the next phase of the pandemic is going to be all of the people who have had the tremendous privilege of isolating at home this whole time come to terms with what level of risk they're comfortable with. For some, once they themselves are vaccinated, they will do whatever they want to/are permitted to do (eat in restaurants, travel, etc). For others, the anxiety over doing even the smallest activity will be a huge hurdle. I have had people tell me they cannot imagine walking back into a grocery store or getting a haircut. This is going to take a lot of time. And of course, there are tons of people who have not been able to shield themselves to that level so may feel more comfortable with the levels of mitigation being taken in schools, even when kids aren't vaccinated.

Oh good gravy. I'm plenty privileged, but I still had to go into the office starting in April. Layered mitigation really does work, as the majority of America that has stepped outside their houses knows.

DP. You know that. I know that. But people who have stayed in their homes for more than a year have not yet discovered that. For many, the disciplined isolation they have engaged in throughout the pandemic is grounded in a need for control and anxiety over risk of harm from the virus. That's not going to go away immediately. Those extremist and their children might find themselves terrified to venture back out into a world which has largely enabled them in demanding a school system free from all COVID risk.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Notice how they say START with the vaccine? What else could they possibly demand beyond a vaccine in the name of safety? I am honestly asking this question.

I honestly wonder that too. With adults as well as children. There’s so many vocal people who say they don’t “feel safe” even with the vaccine. Well what else are we supposed to do? The vaccine IS the end game. Masks and distancing are just stopgap measures.

I'm not that PP, but honestly, I think the next phase of the pandemic is going to be all of the people who have had the tremendous privilege of isolating at home this whole time come to terms with what level of risk they're comfortable with. For some, once they themselves are vaccinated, they will do whatever they want to/are permitted to do (eat in restaurants, travel, etc). For others, the anxiety over doing even the smallest activity will be a huge hurdle. I have had people tell me they cannot imagine walking back into a grocery store or getting a haircut. This is going to take a lot of time. And of course, there are tons of people who have not been able to shield themselves to that level so may feel more comfortable with the levels of mitigation being taken in schools, even when kids aren't vaccinated.

Oh good gravy. I'm plenty privileged, but I still had to go into the office starting in April. Layered mitigation really does work, as the majority of America that has stepped outside their houses knows.

Ok, but to what end? How far are we going to take this? At what point have we mitigated the risk? 2023? 2024? 100% vaccinated across the globe?