FCPS Early Release Mondays

[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.

Not every private school is created equally.

I've worked in two DC-area private schools, and neither required state licensure, nor did we have to do any continuing education beyond updates on school policies.

This is all knowable data long before you enroll your child in private. You can know the specific school policies and the qualifications of your child’s instructors.

Bear in mind as well that there are no qualifications for a substitute teacher other than a background check, and FCPS relies heavily on subs, including long term, so being in public schools is no guarantee your child has a qualified teacher.

[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.

Sent to staff last Friday - read sentence 2:

“We understand that for some families, early release days may present a significant challenge. With that in mind — where necessary — FCPS will provide no-cost opportunities for students to remain at school until their regular dismissal time. Options may include opening SACC sites earlier to supervise currently enrolled SACC students and partnering with community groups to offer supervised enrichment activities. Licensed educators from central office will also be available to support this work. High-impact tutoring will be provided to identified students. The steering committee will provide direction to this work.”

Ok, interesting. Families received this:
While these are designated as early release days — where necessary — we will ensure that every student has supervised enrichment activities at the school and returns home at the regular time if that is what works best for your family. Licensed educators from FCPS’ central office will also be available to support schools. High-impact tutoring will be available for identified students.

I wonder why the wording wasn’t the same.

Written in muddled edu-speak. Key words include; “enrichment activities,” “licensed educators,” “central office,”
“support” and what the heck is “high-impact tutoring” ?

Can you imagine trying to interpret this word salad if your native language isn’t English?

And in the email to staff: “community partners.” Does that mean parks & rec? PTAs? scouts?

[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.

Sent to staff last Friday - read sentence 2:

“We understand that for some families, early release days may present a significant challenge. With that in mind — where necessary — FCPS will provide no-cost opportunities for students to remain at school until their regular dismissal time. Options may include opening SACC sites earlier to supervise currently enrolled SACC students and partnering with community groups to offer supervised enrichment activities. Licensed educators from central office will also be available to support this work. High-impact tutoring will be provided to identified students. The steering committee will provide direction to this work.”

Ok, interesting. Families received this:
While these are designated as early release days — where necessary — we will ensure that every student has supervised enrichment activities at the school and returns home at the regular time if that is what works best for your family. Licensed educators from FCPS’ central office will also be available to support schools. High-impact tutoring will be available for identified students.

I wonder why the wording wasn’t the same.

Written in muddled edu-speak. Key words include; “enrichment activities,” “licensed educators,” “central office,”
“support” and what the heck is “high-impact tutoring” ?

Can you imagine trying to interpret this word salad if your native language isn’t English?

High impact tutors is another governor initiative to help get students on grade level. I know many and will tell you the people I know will leave if they are asked to babysit....it's one thing for them to see their regularly scheduled groups....it's another to babysit. I hope FCPS doesn't mess that up-we need these people to keep working with kids in small groups. They are certified educators...and they make a difference.

[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.

Not every private school is created equally.

I've worked in two DC-area private schools, and neither required state licensure, nor did we have to do any continuing education beyond updates on school policies.

This is all knowable data long before you enroll your child in private. You can know the specific school policies and the qualifications of your child’s instructors.

Bear in mind as well that there are no qualifications for a substitute teacher other than a background check, and FCPS relies heavily on subs, including long term, so being in public schools is no guarantee your child has a qualified teacher.

HUGE difference between having subs throughout the year and your actual English teacher responsible for your literacy education having no qualifications or trainings in that area and no standards or assessments by which they’ll be measured.

[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

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.

Not every private school is created equally.

I've worked in two DC-area private schools, and neither required state licensure, nor did we have to do any continuing education beyond updates on school policies.

This is all knowable data long before you enroll your child in private. You can know the specific school policies and the qualifications of your child’s instructors.

Bear in mind as well that there are no qualifications for a substitute teacher other than a background check, and FCPS relies heavily on subs, including long term, so being in public schools is no guarantee your child has a qualified teacher.

HUGE difference between having subs throughout the year and your actual English teacher responsible for your literacy education having no qualifications or trainings in that area and no standards or assessments by which they’ll be measured.

My 7th grader's english teacher left in the fall. They had rotating short term subs until they got a long term sub. None of them taught anything, they passed out worksheets other teachers in the department created and assigned time on Lexia

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

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

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.

Not every private school is created equally.

I've worked in two DC-area private schools, and neither required state licensure, nor did we have to do any continuing education beyond updates on school policies.

This is all knowable data long before you enroll your child in private. You can know the specific school policies and the qualifications of your child’s instructors.

Bear in mind as well that there are no qualifications for a substitute teacher other than a background check, and FCPS relies heavily on subs, including long term, so being in public schools is no guarantee your child has a qualified teacher.

HUGE difference between having subs throughout the year and your actual English teacher responsible for your literacy education having no qualifications or trainings in that area and no standards or assessments by which they’ll be measured.

My 7th grader's english teacher left in the fall. They had rotating short term subs until they got a long term sub. None of them taught anything, they passed out worksheets other teachers in the department created and assigned time on Lexia

It is basically Russian Roulette if your kid has a certified teacher or a long term sub/teacher trainee.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

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

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.

Not every private school is created equally.

I've worked in two DC-area private schools, and neither required state licensure, nor did we have to do any continuing education beyond updates on school policies.

This is all knowable data long before you enroll your child in private. You can know the specific school policies and the qualifications of your child’s instructors.

Bear in mind as well that there are no qualifications for a substitute teacher other than a background check, and FCPS relies heavily on subs, including long term, so being in public schools is no guarantee your child has a qualified teacher.

HUGE difference between having subs throughout the year and your actual English teacher responsible for your literacy education having no qualifications or trainings in that area and no standards or assessments by which they’ll be measured.

My 7th grader's english teacher left in the fall. They had rotating short term subs until they got a long term sub. None of them taught anything, they passed out worksheets other teachers in the department created and assigned time on Lexia

Alright. Now imagine you PAID for that experience because someone told you “private is better.”

[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:

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.

Sent to staff last Friday - read sentence 2:

“We understand that for some families, early release days may present a significant challenge. With that in mind — where necessary — FCPS will provide no-cost opportunities for students to remain at school until their regular dismissal time. Options may include opening SACC sites earlier to supervise currently enrolled SACC students and partnering with community groups to offer supervised enrichment activities. Licensed educators from central office will also be available to support this work. High-impact tutoring will be provided to identified students. The steering committee will provide direction to this work.”

Ok, interesting. Families received this:
While these are designated as early release days — where necessary — we will ensure that every student has supervised enrichment activities at the school and returns home at the regular time if that is what works best for your family. Licensed educators from FCPS’ central office will also be available to support schools. High-impact tutoring will be available for identified students.

I wonder why the wording wasn’t the same.

Written in muddled edu-speak. Key words include; “enrichment activities,” “licensed educators,” “central office,”
“support” and what the heck is “high-impact tutoring” ?

Can you imagine trying to interpret this word salad if your native language isn’t English?

And in the email to staff: “community partners.” Does that mean parks & rec? PTAs? scouts?

.

Sad, but true and I can interpret/translate:

“Community partners” = we don’t know but will send a mass email asking for volunteers from just about every county agency you can think of -including Volunteer Fairfax, Fire & Rescue, Health Department, Social Services and sure, why not, Parks & Rec.

Stand by for uploaded photos of the tattooed firefighters and uniformed sheriff deputies reading to kindergarteners, Dr. Michelle Reid dressed down in ES spirit wear, hovering over a student playing on a laptop, maybe a K9 lounging beneath a playground table.

It’s gonna be amazing!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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

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.

Not every private school is created equally.

I've worked in two DC-area private schools, and neither required state licensure, nor did we have to do any continuing education beyond updates on school policies.

This is all knowable data long before you enroll your child in private. You can know the specific school policies and the qualifications of your child’s instructors.

Bear in mind as well that there are no qualifications for a substitute teacher other than a background check, and FCPS relies heavily on subs, including long term, so being in public schools is no guarantee your child has a qualified teacher.

HUGE difference between having subs throughout the year and your actual English teacher responsible for your literacy education having no qualifications or trainings in that area and no standards or assessments by which they’ll be measured.

My 7th grader's english teacher left in the fall. They had rotating short term subs until they got a long term sub. None of them taught anything, they passed out worksheets other teachers in the department created and assigned time on Lexia

Alright. Now imagine you PAID for that experience because someone told you “private is better.”

Before you paid for that experience, you’d be able to ask. Private schools love to discuss their highly-credentialed teaching staff (and when they don’t, it’s a red flag and you go elsewhere) You can’t ask your public school whether you’re getting a long term sub (or a rotating cast of short term subs). You can’t even— apparently— expect a calendar posted in May to be accurate in June.

[Anonymous]

My favorite part of the email is “learning happens best in a community” all
While she and the board are working behind the curtain to redistribute everyone. Please!

[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:

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).

Buddy PTAs? May be shocking to learn but there are some schools without solid PTAs.

When my kids were at Chesterbrook, ages ago, our PTA partnered with a high needs elementary school and did quite a few things to support them. Does that not happen anymore?

Our very high SES PTA does nothing other than raise funds (but it does not spend said funds). I imagine someone somewhere is embezzling and it hasn't come out yet.

[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:

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).

Buddy PTAs? May be shocking to learn but there are some schools without solid PTAs.

I can’t imagine how that could happen in a place like FCPS which clearly values parents and understands and prioritizes the needs of working families.

Do you know about poor people? And shitty zoning?

I was being sarcastic. FCPS takes parents for granted and treats them like garbage, available to do unpaid labor at a moments notice to alleviate the need for FCPS to do their own proper planning. I thought the sarcasm was clear.

[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 :D :D

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.

Not every private school is created equally.

I've worked in two DC-area private schools, and neither required state licensure, nor did we have to do any continuing education beyond updates on school policies.

Not every public school is created equally, either. I’ve worked in one that took PD seriously, and I’ve worked in one that made a mockery of it. The same can be said for how observations were handled. I wasn’t observed four years in a row at one of my public schools because admin didn’t care.

[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:

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).

Buddy PTAs? May be shocking to learn but there are some schools without solid PTAs.

When my kids were at Chesterbrook, ages ago, our PTA partnered with a high needs elementary school and did quite a few things to support them. Does that not happen anymore?

At Spring Hill, we run coat drives and Winter Holiday gifts for a less fortunate ES.

No way on God’s green earth will we find enough parents to run a free afterschool program for our OWN Spring Hill students for seven days!!!

Let alone for another school 30 mins drive away.

+1. Same at our school. And we have a pretty strong PTA.

[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:

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.

Sent to staff last Friday - read sentence 2:

“We understand that for some families, early release days may present a significant challenge. With that in mind — where necessary — FCPS will provide no-cost opportunities for students to remain at school until their regular dismissal time. Options may include opening SACC sites earlier to supervise currently enrolled SACC students and partnering with community groups to offer supervised enrichment activities. Licensed educators from central office will also be available to support this work. High-impact tutoring will be provided to identified students. The steering committee will provide direction to this work.”

Ok, interesting. Families received this:
While these are designated as early release days — where necessary — we will ensure that every student has supervised enrichment activities at the school and returns home at the regular time if that is what works best for your family. Licensed educators from FCPS’ central office will also be available to support schools. High-impact tutoring will be available for identified students.

I wonder why the wording wasn’t the same.

Written in muddled edu-speak. Key words include; “enrichment activities,” “licensed educators,” “central office,”
“support” and what the heck is “high-impact tutoring” ?

Can you imagine trying to interpret this word salad if your native language isn’t English?

High impact tutors is another governor initiative to help get students on grade level. I know many and will tell you the people I know will leave if they are asked to babysit....it's one thing for them to see their regularly scheduled groups....it's another to babysit. I hope FCPS doesn't mess that up-we need these people to keep working with kids in small groups. They are certified educators...and they make a difference.

Interesting. Maybe it’s different in elementary? The ones at my high school were not. They had college degrees in the subject they were tutoring (or an adjacent one) but they did not have any teaching experience or licensure.

It was a mixed bag. The requirement that tutoring had to happen during that subject made it rough, as students missed instruction to receive remediation from a semi qualified person. I wish it had happened in lieu of advisory or PE or something instead.