How is MCPS going to address the learning loss from teacher absences?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:MCPS is in chaos right now. Utter and complete chaos.

Dr. McKnight is only focused on ticking off days on a school calendar versus finding solutions so students are actually being educated.

What was the contingency plan for a surge in Covid? None. Central Office didn’t plan before this school year and they all had an extra vacation when the surge was ramping up. Traveling and socializing over break allowed Covid to spread. There was no one monitoring the reports of Covid in Central Office to plan for the return of students on January 3rd.

Dr. McKnight does not show she has the leadership skills to be Superintendent. Many people under her at Central Office are equally incompetent.

The blame for traveling/socializing is on the parents, not MCPS.

MCPS had a plan. They said it over the summer. The plan was do nothing till the state shuts the down. They are following that plan per Hogan. Take it up with Hogan. We were warned this would happen. Many discussions here about it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Has anyone heard of a plan to address the fact the some kids are not getting instruction because their teachers are out and there are no subs?

My high schooler hasn't had math or science since the school year began - so about three days with the snow days. How will the kids make this material up with only a couple of weeks left in the semester? There are no materials in Canvas.

Well, do you job as parent and supplement at home or hold him back one (or two) years.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is going to be a much bigger problem with in-person than it would be with virtual. I was assured that we must avoid virtual at all costs because of learning loss. Ah, well.

Virtual = almost all kids lose some instruction because the curriculum is paired down
In Person = some kids who had to miss school may lose some instruction time loss

All kids losing some instruction is worse than some kids losing some instruction time.

No, see...

Virtual = almost all kids lose some instruction because the curriculum is paired down

In Person = many kids who had to miss school (at a greater rate than they'd have to miss virtual) will lose some instruction time

And

In Person = many kids who never missed school will lose some instruction time to teachers who have to spend much of their time catching up 10-30% of kids who were out last week (for several weeks)

And

In Person = many kids who missed or never missed school will lose some instruction time to teachers who are absent for much longer than they'd be if we had virtual (asymptomatic, close contacts, recovered from symptoms before they stopped being contagious)

And

In Person = (let's say "some") kids who missed or never missed school will lose some instruction time to teachers who are overwhelmed by increased disciplinary demands or who have to teach two classes at once because of a sub shortage. Oh, and specials in ES? If the teacher is out, the teacher is out.

Bottom line:

All kids losing some instruction time is better than most kids losing even more instruction time (maybe just "a little more"), and getting and spreading COVID in greater numbers (maybe only "somewhat" greater numbers), and all of the stress that comes with that.

But you'll never see it that way. Especially if your kid is one of the ones who isn't as affected.

DP, but you are grossly minimizing the negative consequences from virtual. The best case scenario is kids losing "some" instruction time. Fully, what 20%? 30% of kids don't log in to virtual AT ALL, so they get nothing. Probably another third or so log in minimally, have a lot of trouble, try to do it on their own, etc. So virtual is sufficient for, what, a third of kids at the absolute most? Get real.

You don't have to take my word for it, though. There are actual studies on DL, which show what an unmitigated failure it was. Trying to claim otherwise is unconscionable.

Parents need to step up and take responsibility and make sure kids are logging in and doing the work.

Please. Most families don't have an adult at home who can focus solely on supporting their kids during virtual. For elementary-aged kids, it's a TON of work. And older kids need more specialized support that many parents can offer.

Stop gaslighting parents into thinking virtual is a reasonable option and, moreover, that if it doesn't work, it's their fault. It's not.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You are exhausting.

Seriously? Do you have a high school junior who is trying to put together as good as a transcript as they can for college applications? Life is still marching on and these things still matter.

Complaining parents need to step up and teach.

+1 everytime we screw up at work we just look at each other and say "complaining customers should step up and do it themselves "

I find comments along these lines hilarious. So, anybody can “step up and teach,” while at the same time, teachers are highly skilled professionals? Yeah, that makes sense.

OP, you’ll almost certainly need to look to tutoring or some kind of supplementation because MCPS isn’t going to make this lost work up. There are too many other issues and it’s too hard to do. I’m not saying that’s all right, but it is what it is. And no, virtual wouldn’t result in less learning loss; you people know there’s actual data on that, right?

Pretty much anyone can step up and do a substitute teaching gig. Is your body warm? Yep, you probably qualify! (Assuming no record of child endangerment). Maybe consider subbing? I think they’ll even pay you like $14/hour.

I assure you I could not teach my HS daughter's Spanish or algebra class, and my body is warm.

Most subs don’t teach. They babysit. They give an assignment and that’s about it. Or they let students work in unfinished work or homework.

I understood the topic of this thread to be "learning loss from teacher absences." My sitting in a room with a group of teenagers while they at best read an assignment or worse do nothing is not a way to solve learning loss.
Parent subs would be a reasonable (though unrealistic) solution to lack of teachers in lower grades and the need for childcare and/or someone to teach spelling. It does nothing for high schoolers.

Parents can sign up and sub. Most are not willing to.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:MCPS is in chaos right now. Utter and complete chaos.

Dr. McKnight is only focused on ticking off days on a school calendar versus finding solutions so students are actually being educated.

What was the contingency plan for a surge in Covid? None. Central Office didn’t plan before this school year and they all had an extra vacation when the surge was ramping up. Traveling and socializing over break allowed Covid to spread. There was no one monitoring the reports of Covid in Central Office to plan for the return of students on January 3rd.

Dr. McKnight does not show she has the leadership skills to be Superintendent. Many people under her at Central Office are equally incompetent.

The blame for traveling/socializing is on the parents, not MCPS.

MCPS had a plan. They said it over the summer. The plan was do nothing till the state shuts the down. They are following that plan per Hogan. Take it up with Hogan. We were warned this would happen. Many discussions here about it.

??? I'm pretty sure staff shortages as soon as schools opened were not caused by parents traveling and socializing.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:MCPS is in chaos right now. Utter and complete chaos.

Dr. McKnight is only focused on ticking off days on a school calendar versus finding solutions so students are actually being educated.

What was the contingency plan for a surge in Covid? None. Central Office didn’t plan before this school year and they all had an extra vacation when the surge was ramping up. Traveling and socializing over break allowed Covid to spread. There was no one monitoring the reports of Covid in Central Office to plan for the return of students on January 3rd.

Dr. McKnight does not show she has the leadership skills to be Superintendent. Many people under her at Central Office are equally incompetent.

The blame for traveling/socializing is on the parents, not MCPS.

MCPS had a plan. They said it over the summer. The plan was do nothing till the state shuts the down. They are following that plan per Hogan. Take it up with Hogan. We were warned this would happen. Many discussions here about it.

??? I'm pretty sure staff shortages as soon as schools opened were not caused by parents traveling and socializing.

Didn't you know? The spread of covid is caused by parents abandoning their children to hang out in bars on school nights. Has nothing to do with kids unmasking to eat in the lunchroom. !00% irresponsible parenting and nothing to do with incompetent MCPS administrators and BOE members!!

[Anonymous]

Aren't teachers back after 10 days of being sick? are they out long term? I am not understanding what the issue is. Teachers get sick, get better and come back to school.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Aren't teachers back after 10 days of being sick? are they out long term? I am not understanding what the issue is. Teachers get sick, get better and come back to school.

They don't all get sick at the same time. Many of my teacher friends tested positive today and yesterday after testing positive before returning.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Aren't teachers back after 10 days of being sick? are they out long term? I am not understanding what the issue is. Teachers get sick, get better and come back to school.

They don't all get sick at the same time. Many of my teacher friends tested positive today and yesterday after testing positive before returning.

Didn’t the CDC say you can go back to work 10 days after getting covid as long as you are not symptomatic and you wear a mask? I still am not understanding the issue? Teachers get better and return to work.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is going to be a much bigger problem with in-person than it would be with virtual. I was assured that we must avoid virtual at all costs because of learning loss. Ah, well.

Virtual = almost all kids lose some instruction because the curriculum is paired down
In Person = some kids who had to miss school may lose some instruction time loss

All kids losing some instruction is worse than some kids losing some instruction time.

No, see...

Virtual = almost all kids lose some instruction because the curriculum is paired down

In Person = many kids who had to miss school (at a greater rate than they'd have to miss virtual) will lose some instruction time

And

In Person = many kids who never missed school will lose some instruction time to teachers who have to spend much of their time catching up 10-30% of kids who were out last week (for several weeks)

And

In Person = many kids who missed or never missed school will lose some instruction time to teachers who are absent for much longer than they'd be if we had virtual (asymptomatic, close contacts, recovered from symptoms before they stopped being contagious)

And

In Person = (let's say "some") kids who missed or never missed school will lose some instruction time to teachers who are overwhelmed by increased disciplinary demands or who have to teach two classes at once because of a sub shortage. Oh, and specials in ES? If the teacher is out, the teacher is out.

Bottom line:

All kids losing some instruction time is better than most kids losing even more instruction time (maybe just "a little more"), and getting and spreading COVID in greater numbers (maybe only "somewhat" greater numbers), and all of the stress that comes with that.

But you'll never see it that way. Especially if your kid is one of the ones who isn't as affected.

DP, but you are grossly minimizing the negative consequences from virtual. The best case scenario is kids losing "some" instruction time. Fully, what 20%? 30% of kids don't log in to virtual AT ALL, so they get nothing. Probably another third or so log in minimally, have a lot of trouble, try to do it on their own, etc. So virtual is sufficient for, what, a third of kids at the absolute most? Get real.

You don't have to take my word for it, though. There are actual studies on DL, which show what an unmitigated failure it was. Trying to claim otherwise is unconscionable.

Parents need to step up and take responsibility and make sure kids are logging in and doing the work.

Please. Most families don't have an adult at home who can focus solely on supporting their kids during virtual. For elementary-aged kids, it's a TON of work. And older kids need more specialized support that many parents can offer.

Stop gaslighting parents into thinking virtual is a reasonable option and, moreover, that if it doesn't work, it's their fault. It's not.

Of course its an option. Just because you refuse to be a parent and make it work doesn't mean its not an option. Its really unfortunate for yoru kids you are not willing to put in the effort to support them.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Aren't teachers back after 10 days of being sick? are they out long term? I am not understanding what the issue is. Teachers get sick, get better and come back to school.

Assuming they feel better after 10 days and once those teachers are back, others will get sick given how easily and quickly this is spreading.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is going to be a much bigger problem with in-person than it would be with virtual. I was assured that we must avoid virtual at all costs because of learning loss. Ah, well.

Virtual = almost all kids lose some instruction because the curriculum is paired down
In Person = some kids who had to miss school may lose some instruction time loss

All kids losing some instruction is worse than some kids losing some instruction time.

No, see...

Virtual = almost all kids lose some instruction because the curriculum is paired down

In Person = many kids who had to miss school (at a greater rate than they'd have to miss virtual) will lose some instruction time

And

In Person = many kids who never missed school will lose some instruction time to teachers who have to spend much of their time catching up 10-30% of kids who were out last week (for several weeks)

And

In Person = many kids who missed or never missed school will lose some instruction time to teachers who are absent for much longer than they'd be if we had virtual (asymptomatic, close contacts, recovered from symptoms before they stopped being contagious)

And

In Person = (let's say "some") kids who missed or never missed school will lose some instruction time to teachers who are overwhelmed by increased disciplinary demands or who have to teach two classes at once because of a sub shortage. Oh, and specials in ES? If the teacher is out, the teacher is out.

Bottom line:

All kids losing some instruction time is better than most kids losing even more instruction time (maybe just "a little more"), and getting and spreading COVID in greater numbers (maybe only "somewhat" greater numbers), and all of the stress that comes with that.

But you'll never see it that way. Especially if your kid is one of the ones who isn't as affected.

DP, but you are grossly minimizing the negative consequences from virtual. The best case scenario is kids losing "some" instruction time. Fully, what 20%? 30% of kids don't log in to virtual AT ALL, so they get nothing. Probably another third or so log in minimally, have a lot of trouble, try to do it on their own, etc. So virtual is sufficient for, what, a third of kids at the absolute most? Get real.

You don't have to take my word for it, though. There are actual studies on DL, which show what an unmitigated failure it was. Trying to claim otherwise is unconscionable.

Parents need to step up and take responsibility and make sure kids are logging in and doing the work.

Please. Most families don't have an adult at home who can focus solely on supporting their kids during virtual. For elementary-aged kids, it's a TON of work. And older kids need more specialized support that many parents can offer.

Stop gaslighting parents into thinking virtual is a reasonable option and, moreover, that if it doesn't work, it's their fault. It's not.

How? Once my kids knew how to log on, that's all they needed to do. They did their work after dinner and on weekends. My mom helped them log on for the first few days but ended up going home early since they didn't need help after that.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is going to be a much bigger problem with in-person than it would be with virtual. I was assured that we must avoid virtual at all costs because of learning loss. Ah, well.

Virtual = almost all kids lose some instruction because the curriculum is paired down
In Person = some kids who had to miss school may lose some instruction time loss

All kids losing some instruction is worse than some kids losing some instruction time.

No, see...

Virtual = almost all kids lose some instruction because the curriculum is paired down

In Person = many kids who had to miss school (at a greater rate than they'd have to miss virtual) will lose some instruction time

And

In Person = many kids who never missed school will lose some instruction time to teachers who have to spend much of their time catching up 10-30% of kids who were out last week (for several weeks)

And

In Person = many kids who missed or never missed school will lose some instruction time to teachers who are absent for much longer than they'd be if we had virtual (asymptomatic, close contacts, recovered from symptoms before they stopped being contagious)

And

In Person = (let's say "some") kids who missed or never missed school will lose some instruction time to teachers who are overwhelmed by increased disciplinary demands or who have to teach two classes at once because of a sub shortage. Oh, and specials in ES? If the teacher is out, the teacher is out.

Bottom line:

All kids losing some instruction time is better than most kids losing even more instruction time (maybe just "a little more"), and getting and spreading COVID in greater numbers (maybe only "somewhat" greater numbers), and all of the stress that comes with that.

But you'll never see it that way. Especially if your kid is one of the ones who isn't as affected.

DP, but you are grossly minimizing the negative consequences from virtual. The best case scenario is kids losing "some" instruction time. Fully, what 20%? 30% of kids don't log in to virtual AT ALL, so they get nothing. Probably another third or so log in minimally, have a lot of trouble, try to do it on their own, etc. So virtual is sufficient for, what, a third of kids at the absolute most? Get real.

You don't have to take my word for it, though. There are actual studies on DL, which show what an unmitigated failure it was. Trying to claim otherwise is unconscionable.

Parents need to step up and take responsibility and make sure kids are logging in and doing the work.

Please. Most families don't have an adult at home who can focus solely on supporting their kids during virtual. For elementary-aged kids, it's a TON of work. And older kids need more specialized support that many parents can offer.

Stop gaslighting parents into thinking virtual is a reasonable option and, moreover, that if it doesn't work, it's their fault. It's not.

How? Once my kids knew how to log on, that's all they needed to do. They did their work after dinner and on weekends. My mom helped them log on for the first few days but ended up going home early since they didn't need help after that.

Your children sound marvelous! The world needs more sheep who do as they are told. And you are lucky to have grandma there to help.

Unfortunately, some of our children are more of the independent, think outside the box type who get bored with instruction that is beneath their reading and math level. They have a harder time sitting through the day and being virtual exacerbates that.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is going to be a much bigger problem with in-person than it would be with virtual. I was assured that we must avoid virtual at all costs because of learning loss. Ah, well.

Virtual = almost all kids lose some instruction because the curriculum is paired down
In Person = some kids who had to miss school may lose some instruction time loss

All kids losing some instruction is worse than some kids losing some instruction time.

No, see...

Virtual = almost all kids lose some instruction because the curriculum is paired down

In Person = many kids who had to miss school (at a greater rate than they'd have to miss virtual) will lose some instruction time

And

In Person = many kids who never missed school will lose some instruction time to teachers who have to spend much of their time catching up 10-30% of kids who were out last week (for several weeks)

And

In Person = many kids who missed or never missed school will lose some instruction time to teachers who are absent for much longer than they'd be if we had virtual (asymptomatic, close contacts, recovered from symptoms before they stopped being contagious)

And

In Person = (let's say "some") kids who missed or never missed school will lose some instruction time to teachers who are overwhelmed by increased disciplinary demands or who have to teach two classes at once because of a sub shortage. Oh, and specials in ES? If the teacher is out, the teacher is out.

Bottom line:

All kids losing some instruction time is better than most kids losing even more instruction time (maybe just "a little more"), and getting and spreading COVID in greater numbers (maybe only "somewhat" greater numbers), and all of the stress that comes with that.

But you'll never see it that way. Especially if your kid is one of the ones who isn't as affected.

DP, but you are grossly minimizing the negative consequences from virtual. The best case scenario is kids losing "some" instruction time. Fully, what 20%? 30% of kids don't log in to virtual AT ALL, so they get nothing. Probably another third or so log in minimally, have a lot of trouble, try to do it on their own, etc. So virtual is sufficient for, what, a third of kids at the absolute most? Get real.

You don't have to take my word for it, though. There are actual studies on DL, which show what an unmitigated failure it was. Trying to claim otherwise is unconscionable.

Parents need to step up and take responsibility and make sure kids are logging in and doing the work.

Please. Most families don't have an adult at home who can focus solely on supporting their kids during virtual. For elementary-aged kids, it's a TON of work. And older kids need more specialized support that many parents can offer.

Stop gaslighting parents into thinking virtual is a reasonable option and, moreover, that if it doesn't work, it's their fault. It's not.

How? Once my kids knew how to log on, that's all they needed to do. They did their work after dinner and on weekends. My mom helped them log on for the first few days but ended up going home early since they didn't need help after that.

Your children sound marvelous! The world needs more sheep who do as they are told. And you are lucky to have grandma there to help.

Unfortunately, some of our children are more of the independent, think outside the box type who get bored with instruction that is beneath their reading and math level. They have a harder time sitting through the day and being virtual exacerbates that.

Sheep? Don't be an ass.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You are exhausting.

Seriously? Do you have a high school junior who is trying to put together as good as a transcript as they can for college applications? Life is still marching on and these things still matter.

Complaining parents need to step up and teach.

+1 everytime we screw up at work we just look at each other and say "complaining customers should step up and do it themselves "

I find comments along these lines hilarious. So, anybody can “step up and teach,” while at the same time, teachers are highly skilled professionals? Yeah, that makes sense.

OP, you’ll almost certainly need to look to tutoring or some kind of supplementation because MCPS isn’t going to make this lost work up. There are too many other issues and it’s too hard to do. I’m not saying that’s all right, but it is what it is. And no, virtual wouldn’t result in less learning loss; you people know there’s actual data on that, right?

Pretty much anyone can step up and do a substitute teaching gig. Is your body warm? Yep, you probably qualify! (Assuming no record of child endangerment). Maybe consider subbing? I think they’ll even pay you like $14/hour.

I assure you I could not teach my HS daughter's Spanish or algebra class, and my body is warm.

Most subs don’t teach. They babysit. They give an assignment and that’s about it. Or they let students work in unfinished work or homework.

I understood the topic of this thread to be "learning loss from teacher absences." My sitting in a room with a group of teenagers while they at best read an assignment or worse do nothing is not a way to solve learning loss.
Parent subs would be a reasonable (though unrealistic) solution to lack of teachers in lower grades and the need for childcare and/or someone to teach spelling. It does nothing for high schoolers.

Parents can sign up and sub. Most are not willing to.

Did you even read what I wrote? It would not help address learning loss for HSers.