FCPS Early Release Mondays

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why did FCPS decide to do all these disruptive early releases (with double bus runs?!?) rather than just close for full day training? What was the rationale?

Some of us heard it would extend the school year (last day of school), it would still occur sporadically throughout the year (like Loudoun, and a constant area of complaint by FCPS parents) and the additional cost.

FCPS has its issues but honestly nothing makes parents in FCPS happy. The complaints are endless~ at this point it's just noise. Carry on.

It sounds like what you want from parents is to donate time and money, support teacher pay raises and bond funds at election time, tell our children that their teachers are always right in order to avoid undermining the classroom…and…that’s about it?

What value do you see parents having to the system outside the above?

Not the PP, but you read a lot more from that comment than I did.

Maybe, but if the lack of respect and consideration shown for parents by people claiming to be teachers is indicative of the FCPS attitude (which is seems to be) it’s a strong reason to go private. My parents were never treated like their views were “noise” when they raised concerns.

And let’s face it. By parents we mostly mean women. If this was dads who were expected to depart work early for seven additional days, the board would be up in arms.

The main problem with this board is the generalizations. It generalizes parents, teachers, schools, and FCPS itself. Can we not ask our husbands to take PTO a couple times?

Of course we can, and many families will (my own included if we choose to participate in this). But there are a significant number of female-headed single parent households in the area, who do you suggest they “ask” to take PTO?

And the question is the underpinning assumptions. If FCPS assumed only or primarily men would be the ones asked to take time off, they would either have come to a different conclusion about when and how to take the days, they would have rolled out a specific plan for the “in school option” which doesn’t rely on unpaid female labor (explicit in the announcement) and when, for example, a single dad said this is deeply problematic his complaints wouldn’t be brushed off as “noise”.

It’s frustrating that society isn’t fair to women and that real change takes time.

My husband is deployed, so I suspect if they’re a single mom or dad, they already have childcare in place prior to this announcement. It may be an additional expense, which single parents are more than familiar with. It sucks, but life is full of additional expenses that we can’t control (for all households) … but again, they can opt into the stay at school option which will either be free or low-cost.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why did FCPS decide to do all these disruptive early releases (with double bus runs?!?) rather than just close for full day training? What was the rationale?

Some of us heard it would extend the school year (last day of school), it would still occur sporadically throughout the year (like Loudoun, and a constant area of complaint by FCPS parents) and the additional cost.

FCPS has its issues but honestly nothing makes parents in FCPS happy. The complaints are endless~ at this point it's just noise. Carry on.

It sounds like what you want from parents is to donate time and money, support teacher pay raises and bond funds at election time, tell our children that their teachers are always right in order to avoid undermining the classroom…and…that’s about it?

What value do you see parents having to the system outside the above?

Not the PP, but you read a lot more from that comment than I did.

Maybe, but if the lack of respect and consideration shown for parents by people claiming to be teachers is indicative of the FCPS attitude (which is seems to be) it’s a strong reason to go private. My parents were never treated like their views were “noise” when they raised concerns.

And let’s face it. By parents we mostly mean women. If this was dads who were expected to depart work early for seven additional days, the board would be up in arms.

The main problem with this board is the generalizations. It generalizes parents, teachers, schools, and FCPS itself. Can we not ask our husbands to take PTO a couple times?

Of course we can, and many families will (my own included if we choose to participate in this). But there are a significant number of female-headed single parent households in the area, who do you suggest they “ask” to take PTO?

And the question is the underpinning assumptions. If FCPS assumed only or primarily men would be the ones asked to take time off, they would either have come to a different conclusion about when and how to take the days, they would have rolled out a specific plan for the “in school option” which doesn’t rely on unpaid female labor (explicit in the announcement) and when, for example, a single dad said this is deeply problematic his complaints wouldn’t be brushed off as “noise”.

It’s frustrating that society isn’t fair to women and that real change takes time.

My husband is deployed, so I suspect if they’re a single mom or dad, they already have childcare in place prior to this announcement. It may be an additional expense, which single parents are more than familiar with. It sucks, but life is full of additional expenses that we can’t control (for all households) … but again, they can opt into the stay at school option which will either be free or low-cost.

Can you point to the communication from FCPS that says that it will be free or low cost? Because I’ve seen that here but absolutely nowhere else.

And you’re right. Real change takes time. But it also requires people to call out sexism when it’s happening and not be dismissed as “noise” as above.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why did FCPS decide to do all these disruptive early releases (with double bus runs?!?) rather than just close for full day training? What was the rationale?

Some of us heard it would extend the school year (last day of school), it would still occur sporadically throughout the year (like Loudoun, and a constant area of complaint by FCPS parents) and the additional cost.

FCPS has its issues but honestly nothing makes parents in FCPS happy. The complaints are endless~ at this point it's just noise. Carry on.

It sounds like what you want from parents is to donate time and money, support teacher pay raises and bond funds at election time, tell our children that their teachers are always right in order to avoid undermining the classroom…and…that’s about it?

What value do you see parents having to the system outside the above?

Not the PP, but you read a lot more from that comment than I did.

Maybe, but if the lack of respect and consideration shown for parents by people claiming to be teachers is indicative of the FCPS attitude (which is seems to be) it’s a strong reason to go private. My parents were never treated like their views were “noise” when they raised concerns.

And let’s face it. By parents we mostly mean women. If this was dads who were expected to depart work early for seven additional days, the board would be up in arms.

The main problem with this board is the generalizations. It generalizes parents, teachers, schools, and FCPS itself. Can we not ask our husbands to take PTO a couple times?

Of course we can, and many families will (my own included if we choose to participate in this). But there are a significant number of female-headed single parent households in the area, who do you suggest they “ask” to take PTO?

And the question is the underpinning assumptions. If FCPS assumed only or primarily men would be the ones asked to take time off, they would either have come to a different conclusion about when and how to take the days, they would have rolled out a specific plan for the “in school option” which doesn’t rely on unpaid female labor (explicit in the announcement) and when, for example, a single dad said this is deeply problematic his complaints wouldn’t be brushed off as “noise”.

It’s frustrating that society isn’t fair to women and that real change takes time.

My husband is deployed, so I suspect if they’re a single mom or dad, they already have childcare in place prior to this announcement. It may be an additional expense, which single parents are more than familiar with. It sucks, but life is full of additional expenses that we can’t control (for all households) … but again, they can opt into the stay at school option which will either be free or low-cost.

Can you point to the communication from FCPS that says that it will be free or low cost? Because I’ve seen that here but absolutely nowhere else.

And you’re right. Real change takes time. But it also requires people to call out sexism when it’s happening and not be dismissed as “noise” as above.

I’m not the previous poster but also have not seen anything stating it will be free or low cost. I don’t think anyone knows, because there doesn’t appear to be a plan at this point. If you watch last Thursday’s school board meeting, within the same five minutes Dr. Reid talked about:
-central office staff helping with supervision (free?)
-PTAs with robust afternoon programming beginning those activities earlier in the afternoon. (These are often fee-based.)
-composting, as in “This could be a great time to think about composting.” (free?)
-PTAs that have an abundance of support creating “buddy PTAs” where they can support a buddy school across the county (supporting them with…volunteers?…ideas?…funds? It was unclear.)

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:This is one of the reasons people go private. This plan sounds ludicrous and would never happen there.

A lot of things wouldn't happen there. Go private.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:No learning happens on three hour early release days.

Everyone would be better off if they just closed for a few days for the training. Extended fall break, start school a few days later, whatever.

It's not whatever...parents will complain however this is done.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is one of the reasons people go private. This plan sounds ludicrous and would never happen there.

There’s so much irony in this because you’re right: this would never happen in private because in private school, nobody has to be formally educated in how to do things like teach kids to read. There’s no such thing as licensure requirements to ensure that teachers meet a minimum competency to educate. You just need a bachelor’s degree and a job application. There’d never be any such thing as 32 *additional hours* of literacy training all teachers at a private would ever be required to do. But yeah, private is definitely better

I work for a Catholic high school. State certification and continuing education are requirements for employment. We have more PD days than my former public system, and the PDs are considerably more useful.

The only difference is we do a lot of our PD over the summer so it doesn’t impact the school year. Yes, we are paid for those trainings.

There is a ton of misinformation on this thread about private schools.

Paid at your “daily rate”?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is one of the reasons people go private. This plan sounds ludicrous and would never happen there.

There’s so much irony in this because you’re right: this would never happen in private because in private school, nobody has to be formally educated in how to do things like teach kids to read. There’s no such thing as licensure requirements to ensure that teachers meet a minimum competency to educate. You just need a bachelor’s degree and a job application. There’d never be any such thing as 32 *additional hours* of literacy training all teachers at a private would ever be required to do. But yeah, private is definitely better

I work for a Catholic high school. State certification and continuing education are requirements for employment. We have more PD days than my former public system, and the PDs are considerably more useful.

The only difference is we do a lot of our PD over the summer so it doesn’t impact the school year. Yes, we are paid for those trainings.

There is a ton of misinformation on this thread about private schools.

Paid at your “daily rate”?

Yes, which isn’t nearly as bad as I thought it would be when I transferred.

I thought about switching to private for years, but didn’t because I heard pay is so much lower. While it is lower, it isn’t dramatically so. And I am paid for things I wasn’t in public: after-school activities, reimbursements for all supplies, additional trainings, etc.

On topic for this thread: I doubt FCPS can pay for summer trainings simply because there are so many teachers. Privates operate on a smaller scale, so it’s easier.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is one of the reasons people go private. This plan sounds ludicrous and would never happen there.

Again, looking through FCPS ubiquitous Equity Lens ™️ once again certain students from a certain demographic will indeed be unintentionally “left behind” - while the more savvy parents will have the flexibility to make suitable arrangements for their DC upon these sporadic early closings, other parents will not and will instead rely upon the school arrangements that will be subpar.

The school will usher the have-nots into the cafeteria or gym where they’ll stare at screens, eat donated snacks of Cheetos and chips, maybe go out to the playground where most will just sit on benches waiting for parent pick up.

This is the reality. There is very little actual learning taking place in FCPS, most especially in ES. The joke is on us.

This is so true.

Thank you. I’ve seen a few things and tried for years to make inroads and changes.
Just reporting as I’ve seen it over 2 decades. It is very sad yet every year the disparities widen. I stopped even responding to the insipid parent engagement surveys because another colossal waste of time and money.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is one of the reasons people go private. This plan sounds ludicrous and would never happen there.

There’s so much irony in this because you’re right: this would never happen in private because in private school, nobody has to be formally educated in how to do things like teach kids to read. There’s no such thing as licensure requirements to ensure that teachers meet a minimum competency to educate. You just need a bachelor’s degree and a job application. There’d never be any such thing as 32 *additional hours* of literacy training all teachers at a private would ever be required to do. But yeah, private is definitely better

I work for a Catholic high school. State certification and continuing education are requirements for employment. We have more PD days than my former public system, and the PDs are considerably more useful.

The only difference is we do a lot of our PD over the summer so it doesn’t impact the school year. Yes, we are paid for those trainings.

There is a ton of misinformation on this thread about private schools.

Paid at your “daily rate”?

Yes, which isn’t nearly as bad as I thought it would be when I transferred.

I thought about switching to private for years, but didn’t because I heard pay is so much lower. While it is lower, it isn’t dramatically so. And I am paid for things I wasn’t in public: after-school activities, reimbursements for all supplies, additional trainings, etc.

On topic for this thread: I doubt FCPS can pay for summer trainings simply because there are so many teachers. Privates operate on a smaller scale, so it’s easier.

I think this was put on place for PWCS as part of their new bargaining agreement, but I’d have to double check.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is one of the reasons people go private. This plan sounds ludicrous and would never happen there.

There’s so much irony in this because you’re right: this would never happen in private because in private school, nobody has to be formally educated in how to do things like teach kids to read. There’s no such thing as licensure requirements to ensure that teachers meet a minimum competency to educate. You just need a bachelor’s degree and a job application. There’d never be any such thing as 32 *additional hours* of literacy training all teachers at a private would ever be required to do. But yeah, private is definitely better

I work for a Catholic high school. State certification and continuing education are requirements for employment. We have more PD days than my former public system, and the PDs are considerably more useful.

The only difference is we do a lot of our PD over the summer so it doesn’t impact the school year. Yes, we are paid for those trainings.

There is a ton of misinformation on this thread about private schools.

Paid at your “daily rate”?

Yes, which isn’t nearly as bad as I thought it would be when I transferred.

I thought about switching to private for years, but didn’t because I heard pay is so much lower. While it is lower, it isn’t dramatically so. And I am paid for things I wasn’t in public: after-school activities, reimbursements for all supplies, additional trainings, etc.

On topic for this thread: I doubt FCPS can pay for summer trainings simply because there are so many teachers. Privates operate on a smaller scale, so it’s easier.

It’s because FCPS teachers are contracted. They cannot add 32 hours (4.25 days) of work to the contract without ratifying and resigning already signed contracts. Even if they offered summer pay to do the training, which they can’t because the trainings don’t exist, it would have to be voluntarily done in summer for pay as they can’t compel work out of the contract.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is one of the reasons people go private. This plan sounds ludicrous and would never happen there.

There’s so much irony in this because you’re right: this would never happen in private because in private school, nobody has to be formally educated in how to do things like teach kids to read. There’s no such thing as licensure requirements to ensure that teachers meet a minimum competency to educate. You just need a bachelor’s degree and a job application. There’d never be any such thing as 32 *additional hours* of literacy training all teachers at a private would ever be required to do. But yeah, private is definitely better

OK but you know what? This totally depends on the private.

DP, that can also be true. I hear that ones that cost $30-40K a year can be quite good.

What they cost has no bearing on the quality of the teachers. Ask yourself why teachers who could teach public and make twice as much and have job protection would choose to work at a private making very little money, being at will, and doing essentially the same kind of work unless they couldn’t teach for the state because they lacked the proper qualifications.

Some teachers leave public and go private. Not many and usually not the good ones. and the majority of private school teachers teach there because they aren’t able to teach elsewhere. What the school charges you doesn’t change that.

This is NOT true. 2/3rds of the teachers at my private school are former public school teachers. Most of us left for greater respect and autonomy. We grew tired of county micromanagement, and we didn’t want to support the counties’ poor decisions. And many of us are National Board Certified and many of us are very good at what we do. (It is true that it helps to have a high-earning spouse.)

This is not true for YOUR school. There are just as many Fusions, etc having people with a bachelors in math teach history.

[Anonymous]

They are going to need to update the calendar. The current one trumpets the number of 5 day weeks.

https://www.fcps.edu/system/files/forms/2024-01/2024-2025-standard-school-year-calendar.pdf

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why did FCPS decide to do all these disruptive early releases (with double bus runs?!?) rather than just close for full day training? What was the rationale?

Some of us heard it would extend the school year (last day of school), it would still occur sporadically throughout the year (like Loudoun, and a constant area of complaint by FCPS parents) and the additional cost.

FCPS has its issues but honestly nothing makes parents in FCPS happy. The complaints are endless~ at this point it's just noise. Carry on.

It sounds like what you want from parents is to donate time and money, support teacher pay raises and bond funds at election time, tell our children that their teachers are always right in order to avoid undermining the classroom…and…that’s about it?

What value do you see parents having to the system outside the above?

Not the PP, but you read a lot more from that comment than I did.

Maybe, but if the lack of respect and consideration shown for parents by people claiming to be teachers is indicative of the FCPS attitude (which is seems to be) it’s a strong reason to go private. My parents were never treated like their views were “noise” when they raised concerns.

And let’s face it. By parents we mostly mean women. If this was dads who were expected to depart work early for seven additional days, the board would be up in arms.

The main problem with this board is the generalizations. It generalizes parents, teachers, schools, and FCPS itself. Can we not ask our husbands to take PTO a couple times?

Of course we can, and many families will (my own included if we choose to participate in this). But there are a significant number of female-headed single parent households in the area, who do you suggest they “ask” to take PTO?

And the question is the underpinning assumptions. If FCPS assumed only or primarily men would be the ones asked to take time off, they would either have come to a different conclusion about when and how to take the days, they would have rolled out a specific plan for the “in school option” which doesn’t rely on unpaid female labor (explicit in the announcement) and when, for example, a single dad said this is deeply problematic his complaints wouldn’t be brushed off as “noise”.

It’s frustrating that society isn’t fair to women and that real change takes time.

My husband is deployed, so I suspect if they’re a single mom or dad, they already have childcare in place prior to this announcement. It may be an additional expense, which single parents are more than familiar with. It sucks, but life is full of additional expenses that we can’t control (for all households) … but again, they can opt into the stay at school option which will either be free or low-cost.

Can you point to the communication from FCPS that says that it will be free or low cost? Because I’ve seen that here but absolutely nowhere else.

And you’re right. Real change takes time. But it also requires people to call out sexism when it’s happening and not be dismissed as “noise” as above.

I’m not the previous poster but also have not seen anything stating it will be free or low cost. I don’t think anyone knows, because there doesn’t appear to be a plan at this point. If you watch last Thursday’s school board meeting, within the same five minutes Dr. Reid talked about:
-central office staff helping with supervision (free?)
-PTAs with robust afternoon programming beginning those activities earlier in the afternoon. (These are often fee-based.)
-composting, as in “This could be a great time to think about composting.” (free?)
-PTAs that have an abundance of support creating “buddy PTAs” where they can support a buddy school across the county (supporting them with…volunteers?…ideas?…funds? It was unclear.)

This is so naive of Dr. Reid. I’m really disappointed.

This is a huge ask for PTAs. Looking at the bylaws, it’s outside of the scope for ours and we could not take on the task of offering 7 days of childcare without a vote of the general membership. And we do not have the funds to pay for this and would need to charge market rate (likely $50 per kid per day for this).

[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:Why did FCPS decide to do all these disruptive early releases (with double bus runs?!?) rather than just close for full day training? What was the rationale?

Some of us heard it would extend the school year (last day of school), it would still occur sporadically throughout the year (like Loudoun, and a constant area of complaint by FCPS parents) and the additional cost.

FCPS has its issues but honestly nothing makes parents in FCPS happy. The complaints are endless~ at this point it's just noise. Carry on.

It sounds like what you want from parents is to donate time and money, support teacher pay raises and bond funds at election time, tell our children that their teachers are always right in order to avoid undermining the classroom…and…that’s about it?

What value do you see parents having to the system outside the above?

Not the PP, but you read a lot more from that comment than I did.

Maybe, but if the lack of respect and consideration shown for parents by people claiming to be teachers is indicative of the FCPS attitude (which is seems to be) it’s a strong reason to go private. My parents were never treated like their views were “noise” when they raised concerns.

And let’s face it. By parents we mostly mean women. If this was dads who were expected to depart work early for seven additional days, the board would be up in arms.

The main problem with this board is the generalizations. It generalizes parents, teachers, schools, and FCPS itself. Can we not ask our husbands to take PTO a couple times?

Of course we can, and many families will (my own included if we choose to participate in this). But there are a significant number of female-headed single parent households in the area, who do you suggest they “ask” to take PTO?

And the question is the underpinning assumptions. If FCPS assumed only or primarily men would be the ones asked to take time off, they would either have come to a different conclusion about when and how to take the days, they would have rolled out a specific plan for the “in school option” which doesn’t rely on unpaid female labor (explicit in the announcement) and when, for example, a single dad said this is deeply problematic his complaints wouldn’t be brushed off as “noise”.

It’s frustrating that society isn’t fair to women and that real change takes time.

My husband is deployed, so I suspect if they’re a single mom or dad, they already have childcare in place prior to this announcement. It may be an additional expense, which single parents are more than familiar with. It sucks, but life is full of additional expenses that we can’t control (for all households) … but again, they can opt into the stay at school option which will either be free or low-cost.

Can you point to the communication from FCPS that says that it will be free or low cost? Because I’ve seen that here but absolutely nowhere else.

And you’re right. Real change takes time. But it also requires people to call out sexism when it’s happening and not be dismissed as “noise” as above.

I’m not the previous poster but also have not seen anything stating it will be free or low cost. I don’t think anyone knows, because there doesn’t appear to be a plan at this point. If you watch last Thursday’s school board meeting, within the same five minutes Dr. Reid talked about:
-central office staff helping with supervision (free?)
-PTAs with robust afternoon programming beginning those activities earlier in the afternoon. (These are often fee-based.)
-composting, as in “This could be a great time to think about composting.” (free?)
-PTAs that have an abundance of support creating “buddy PTAs” where they can support a buddy school across the county (supporting them with…volunteers?…ideas?…funds? It was unclear.)

This is so naive of Dr. Reid. I’m really disappointed.

This is a huge ask for PTAs. Looking at the bylaws, it’s outside of the scope for ours and we could not take on the task of offering 7 days of childcare without a vote of the general membership. And we do not have the funds to pay for this and would need to charge market rate (likely $50 per kid per day for this).

Yeah, this is what I mean by flailing.

Imagine if they started in March like everyone else…

[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:Why did FCPS decide to do all these disruptive early releases (with double bus runs?!?) rather than just close for full day training? What was the rationale?

Some of us heard it would extend the school year (last day of school), it would still occur sporadically throughout the year (like Loudoun, and a constant area of complaint by FCPS parents) and the additional cost.

FCPS has its issues but honestly nothing makes parents in FCPS happy. The complaints are endless~ at this point it's just noise. Carry on.

It sounds like what you want from parents is to donate time and money, support teacher pay raises and bond funds at election time, tell our children that their teachers are always right in order to avoid undermining the classroom…and…that’s about it?

What value do you see parents having to the system outside the above?

Not the PP, but you read a lot more from that comment than I did.

Maybe, but if the lack of respect and consideration shown for parents by people claiming to be teachers is indicative of the FCPS attitude (which is seems to be) it’s a strong reason to go private. My parents were never treated like their views were “noise” when they raised concerns.

And let’s face it. By parents we mostly mean women. If this was dads who were expected to depart work early for seven additional days, the board would be up in arms.

The main problem with this board is the generalizations. It generalizes parents, teachers, schools, and FCPS itself. Can we not ask our husbands to take PTO a couple times?

Of course we can, and many families will (my own included if we choose to participate in this). But there are a significant number of female-headed single parent households in the area, who do you suggest they “ask” to take PTO?

And the question is the underpinning assumptions. If FCPS assumed only or primarily men would be the ones asked to take time off, they would either have come to a different conclusion about when and how to take the days, they would have rolled out a specific plan for the “in school option” which doesn’t rely on unpaid female labor (explicit in the announcement) and when, for example, a single dad said this is deeply problematic his complaints wouldn’t be brushed off as “noise”.

It’s frustrating that society isn’t fair to women and that real change takes time.

My husband is deployed, so I suspect if they’re a single mom or dad, they already have childcare in place prior to this announcement. It may be an additional expense, which single parents are more than familiar with. It sucks, but life is full of additional expenses that we can’t control (for all households) … but again, they can opt into the stay at school option which will either be free or low-cost.

Can you point to the communication from FCPS that says that it will be free or low cost? Because I’ve seen that here but absolutely nowhere else.

And you’re right. Real change takes time. But it also requires people to call out sexism when it’s happening and not be dismissed as “noise” as above.

I’m not the previous poster but also have not seen anything stating it will be free or low cost. I don’t think anyone knows, because there doesn’t appear to be a plan at this point. If you watch last Thursday’s school board meeting, within the same five minutes Dr. Reid talked about:
-central office staff helping with supervision (free?)
-PTAs with robust afternoon programming beginning those activities earlier in the afternoon. (These are often fee-based.)
-composting, as in “This could be a great time to think about composting.” (free?)
-PTAs that have an abundance of support creating “buddy PTAs” where they can support a buddy school across the county (supporting them with…volunteers?…ideas?…funds? It was unclear.)

This is so naive of Dr. Reid. I’m really disappointed.

This is a huge ask for PTAs. Looking at the bylaws, it’s outside of the scope for ours and we could not take on the task of offering 7 days of childcare without a vote of the general membership. And we do not have the funds to pay for this and would need to charge market rate (likely $50 per kid per day for this).

Yeah, this is what I mean by flailing.

Imagine if they started in March like everyone else…

Is childcare the same as sponsoring a chess or checker club that occurs afterschool?