APS grades 3-5 teachers

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Everyone should be urging APS to hold off until teachers are vaccinated. How long can that possibly take???

You’d be surprised. APS teachers had to get new ID cards this year and offered extremely limited appointment times. The office sat mostly empty between 2 minute appointments and staff who showed up without an appointment were turned away even if no one was waiting.

[Anonymous]

Does anybody know how I can switch my preference from hybrid to DL?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Does anybody know how I can switch my preference from hybrid to DL?

That would be a question for the specific school’s administration.

[Anonymous]

March. Open in March. Opening now and essentially destroying trust with teachers and staff by forcing back at peak of COVID is really a bad move. Vaccines are due any day now for 1b. Very bad choice by management. And it won’t likely last with virus rates. So ridiculous.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’m an APS teacher in grades 3-5 and have not yet heard about this but perhaps I will be told Monday. I did want to share that the vast majority of teachers who were authorized to remain virtual under thE CARES act are now being told they must return in-person or take a leave of absence. If you take an unpaid leave you must request it by Jan 26. Only a very very small number of teachers who themselves qualify for an ADA accommodation (not CDC categories) can be virtual.

Just to give you one story, my wife is undergoing cancer treatment (chemo) at this time on leave from her job. This treatment obviously affects her immune system and puts her at very high risk and I was given a virtual assignment under the CARES act. However having a family member at high risk is not part of ADA and so now I have been told I must return in person or take unpaid leave. Even if I get the vaccine (I want it) there is a thought that one can still possibly transmit the virus even if they are vaccinated and due to my wife’s treatment she will not be able to get the vaccine until the beginning of April after her treatment ends and her immune system comes back up to make the vaccine more effective. We cannot survive without my salary and our insurance is from APS as well.

I’m not the only teacher in this scenario.

Parent of ES kid here (K-2). I am truly sorry that you are facing this. See, this is where I would like to know what each teacher wants to do. Not what they're being requested to do. But what is their actual preference. I can imagine some ES teachers truly want to be back in the building. Some don't for various reasons. I wish it could be made apparent within each school which teachers WANT to be back in the building, and which don't. I am lucky enough to be in a situation where I can be flexible in my choice, but fully acknowledge that not every parent is and/or not every child is being affected the same way by DL. There might not be a way to satisfy everyone, and I realize it would be logistically very difficult to do, but nobody is even trying.

Honestly most of this could have been avoided if people didn't get so hysterical about the idea of having a teacher from another school. Both parents and staff were guilty of this. If they could have moved teachers around for this year we would have been able to have DL teachers and school-based teachers.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Everyone should be urging APS to hold off until teachers are vaccinated. How long can that possibly take???

You’d be surprised. APS teachers had to get new ID cards this year and offered extremely limited appointment times. The office sat mostly empty between 2 minute appointments and staff who showed up without an appointment were turned away even if no one was waiting.

They have done flu shot vaccinations for years though, so they already have a system. I'd prefer school-based over Syphax but I'll happily show up wherever

[Anonymous]

Honestly most of this could have been avoided if people didn't get so hysterical about the idea of having a teacher from another school. Both parents and staff were guilty of this. If they could have moved teachers around for this year we would have been able to have DL teachers and school-based teachers.

Thanks for blaming teachers. Teachers were never asked for any input on these plans and we were told we might be given different locations if needed so I don’t see how the responsibility lies there. We are in a global pandemic and conditions change rapidly.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Honestly most of this could have been avoided if people didn't get so hysterical about the idea of having a teacher from another school. Both parents and staff were guilty of this. If they could have moved teachers around for this year we would have been able to have DL teachers and school-based teachers.

Thanks for blaming teachers. Teachers were never asked for any input on these plans and we were told we might be given different locations if needed so I don’t see how the responsibility lies there. We are in a global pandemic and conditions change rapidly.

PP. I am an APS teacher.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’m an APS teacher in grades 3-5 and have not yet heard about this but perhaps I will be told Monday. I did want to share that the vast majority of teachers who were authorized to remain virtual under thE CARES act are now being told they must return in-person or take a leave of absence. If you take an unpaid leave you must request it by Jan 26. Only a very very small number of teachers who themselves qualify for an ADA accommodation (not CDC categories) can be virtual.

Just to give you one story, my wife is undergoing cancer treatment (chemo) at this time on leave from her job. This treatment obviously affects her immune system and puts her at very high risk and I was given a virtual assignment under the CARES act. However having a family member at high risk is not part of ADA and so now I have been told I must return in person or take unpaid leave. Even if I get the vaccine (I want it) there is a thought that one can still possibly transmit the virus even if they are vaccinated and due to my wife’s treatment she will not be able to get the vaccine until the beginning of April after her treatment ends and her immune system comes back up to make the vaccine more effective. We cannot survive without my salary and our insurance is from APS as well.

I’m not the only teacher in this scenario.

Parent of ES kid here (K-2). I am truly sorry that you are facing this. See, this is where I would like to know what each teacher wants to do. Not what they're being requested to do. But what is their actual preference. I can imagine some ES teachers truly want to be back in the building. Some don't for various reasons. I wish it could be made apparent within each school which teachers WANT to be back in the building, and which don't. I am lucky enough to be in a situation where I can be flexible in my choice, but fully acknowledge that not every parent is and/or not every child is being affected the same way by DL. There might not be a way to satisfy everyone, and I realize it would be logistically very difficult to do, but nobody is even trying.

Honestly most of this could have been avoided if people didn't get so hysterical about the idea of having a teacher from another school. Both parents and staff were guilty of this. If they could have moved teachers around for this year we would have been able to have DL teachers and school-based teachers.

OR,

How about they could’ve asked teachers their preference, and then communicated that to the parents and asked them whether or not they preferred to stay with the teacher, or switch if their preference didn’t match. There would’ve been a lot less sturm und drang if they’d done it that way. That would’ve given both families and teachers agency. And I bet the majority of families would’ve accepted DL to stay with their preferred teacher, and the ones who really needed to be in hybrid would’ve accepted a new teacher, one who wasn’t being forced to be there, more readily.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’m an APS teacher in grades 3-5 and have not yet heard about this but perhaps I will be told Monday. I did want to share that the vast majority of teachers who were authorized to remain virtual under thE CARES act are now being told they must return in-person or take a leave of absence. If you take an unpaid leave you must request it by Jan 26. Only a very very small number of teachers who themselves qualify for an ADA accommodation (not CDC categories) can be virtual.

Just to give you one story, my wife is undergoing cancer treatment (chemo) at this time on leave from her job. This treatment obviously affects her immune system and puts her at very high risk and I was given a virtual assignment under the CARES act. However having a family member at high risk is not part of ADA and so now I have been told I must return in person or take unpaid leave. Even if I get the vaccine (I want it) there is a thought that one can still possibly transmit the virus even if they are vaccinated and due to my wife’s treatment she will not be able to get the vaccine until the beginning of April after her treatment ends and her immune system comes back up to make the vaccine more effective. We cannot survive without my salary and our insurance is from APS as well.

I’m not the only teacher in this scenario.

Parent of ES kid here (K-2). I am truly sorry that you are facing this. See, this is where I would like to know what each teacher wants to do. Not what they're being requested to do. But what is their actual preference. I can imagine some ES teachers truly want to be back in the building. Some don't for various reasons. I wish it could be made apparent within each school which teachers WANT to be back in the building, and which don't. I am lucky enough to be in a situation where I can be flexible in my choice, but fully acknowledge that not every parent is and/or not every child is being affected the same way by DL. There might not be a way to satisfy everyone, and I realize it would be logistically very difficult to do, but nobody is even trying.

Honestly most of this could have been avoided if people didn't get so hysterical about the idea of having a teacher from another school. Both parents and staff were guilty of this. If they could have moved teachers around for this year we would have been able to have DL teachers and school-based teachers.

OR,

How about they could’ve asked teachers their preference, and then communicated that to the parents and asked them whether or not they preferred to stay with the teacher, or switch if their preference didn’t match. There would’ve been a lot less sturm und drang if they’d done it that way. That would’ve given both families and teachers agency. And I bet the majority of families would’ve accepted DL to stay with their preferred teacher, and the ones who really needed to be in hybrid would’ve accepted a new teacher, one who wasn’t being forced to be there, more readily.

Everyone knows that there are teachers that just aren't very good and that everyone hopes to avoid; on the flip side, there are some particularly great teacher that lots of people want. If parents were given the option to "follow their teacher," you'd get a bunch of people making strategic decisions to try to get their kid moved away from a particular teacher or into a particular teacher's class, which will create a whole host of other issues.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:March. Open in March. Opening now and essentially destroying trust with teachers and staff by forcing back at peak of COVID is really a bad move. Vaccines are due any day now for 1b. Very bad choice by management. And it won’t likely last with virus rates. So ridiculous.

Schools aren’t opening now, except for teachers.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’m an APS teacher in grades 3-5 and have not yet heard about this but perhaps I will be told Monday. I did want to share that the vast majority of teachers who were authorized to remain virtual under thE CARES act are now being told they must return in-person or take a leave of absence. If you take an unpaid leave you must request it by Jan 26. Only a very very small number of teachers who themselves qualify for an ADA accommodation (not CDC categories) can be virtual.

Just to give you one story, my wife is undergoing cancer treatment (chemo) at this time on leave from her job. This treatment obviously affects her immune system and puts her at very high risk and I was given a virtual assignment under the CARES act. However having a family member at high risk is not part of ADA and so now I have been told I must return in person or take unpaid leave. Even if I get the vaccine (I want it) there is a thought that one can still possibly transmit the virus even if they are vaccinated and due to my wife’s treatment she will not be able to get the vaccine until the beginning of April after her treatment ends and her immune system comes back up to make the vaccine more effective. We cannot survive without my salary and our insurance is from APS as well.

I’m not the only teacher in this scenario.

Parent of ES kid here (K-2). I am truly sorry that you are facing this. See, this is where I would like to know what each teacher wants to do. Not what they're being requested to do. But what is their actual preference. I can imagine some ES teachers truly want to be back in the building. Some don't for various reasons. I wish it could be made apparent within each school which teachers WANT to be back in the building, and which don't. I am lucky enough to be in a situation where I can be flexible in my choice, but fully acknowledge that not every parent is and/or not every child is being affected the same way by DL. There might not be a way to satisfy everyone, and I realize it would be logistically very difficult to do, but nobody is even trying.

Honestly most of this could have been avoided if people didn't get so hysterical about the idea of having a teacher from another school. Both parents and staff were guilty of this. If they could have moved teachers around for this year we would have been able to have DL teachers and school-based teachers.

OR,

How about they could’ve asked teachers their preference, and then communicated that to the parents and asked them whether or not they preferred to stay with the teacher, or switch if their preference didn’t match. There would’ve been a lot less sturm und drang if they’d done it that way. That would’ve given both families and teachers agency. And I bet the majority of families would’ve accepted DL to stay with their preferred teacher, and the ones who really needed to be in hybrid would’ve accepted a new teacher, one who wasn’t being forced to be there, more readily.

Everyone knows that there are teachers that just aren't very good and that everyone hopes to avoid; on the flip side, there are some particularly great teacher that lots of people want. If parents were given the option to "follow their teacher," you'd get a bunch of people making strategic decisions to try to get their kid moved away from a particular teacher or into a particular teacher's class, which will create a whole host of other issues.

If a parent is calculating that much in the midst of this mess, then they really don’t need either DL or Hybrid and can get what they get. It wouldn’t have been like this except maybe for a few terrible parents. But maybe our school isn’t quite so cutthroat or has fewer awful teachers.

[Anonymous]

Then why are some schools reassigning kids to virtual vs hybrid classes/teachers?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Then why are some schools reassigning kids to virtual vs hybrid classes/teachers?

What schools are doing this?

[Anonymous]

An email was posted in another thread from Campbell Elementary.