All schools should offer an all-virtual option

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:PG isn’t comparable in that they don’t have half of kids attending charters. Logistically a very different story.

That makes things EASIER for DCPS.

No, offering a virtual option at every school means charters as well, and no central option for the entirety of DC.

I also think charters (and the entire lottery system, for that matter) inhibit DCPS's ability to offer strong centralized leadership as PGPS has. There are so many competing interests in DCPS, it's very hard to unite school communities behind any big idea.

I also think the way DC public schooling is structured contributes to a culture of families not really caring about each other on a basic level. You compete in a lottery for spots, even IB spots at the PK level can be competitive. And then you have school themselves competing with one another for resources. It's a system that isolates families within it. And I think that's one reason you see some of the attitudes on display on this thread and in the whole IPL versus virtual debate. There is always a sense that someone is trying to take something away from you, whether it's a slot at a school or resources or access to a program. That may not be the intention of the system, but that's the effect.

So now parents who have the means to keep their kids virtual want to do so. And I get that, honestly. If I had a way of keeping my kid out of school this year I'd be seriously considering it. The problem is that I don't have that option -- for me, it's in person public school or just sheer misery (maybe job loss, maybe a mental breakdown, it's hard to say at this point). And when I see parents agitating for virtual options in a way that feels designed to undermine in person schooling, yeah, I get anxious. Because I need in person school. Like NEED it.

I wish DCPS could figure out a way to do this that gave everyone what the wanted and needed. But I'm afraid they won't (they never do) and I don't want to wind up with the short end of the stick this time. I can't afford it, frankly.

I’m one of the virtual option proponents and I agree with almost everything you say, but would offer that I and many others I know that are pushing for virtual do not want to remove the option for IPL. In fact I don’t even want simulcast or every school to have virtual as that works less well for everyone (my view only). An irony on the other side is that those digging their heels in against virtual for others could hurt their own cause. As many have reflected expanding the virtual academy doesn’t happen easily. If we had been working on a plan B for risk averse parents, or in case things go south as they are for many schools now closing, there wohld has been much less change that the answer would be to simulcast. But I bet that’s what they’ll do. DCPS right now feels painted into a corner. They, backed by parents willing to call pandemic cautious people names “anxious” and “fear mongering” “afraid of their own shadow” were emboldened into tripling down on a poor choice. It does seem to be the Bowser administrations way (and I voted for her and want to support her, but that’s over..).

I do want to say that if there is a shift to virtual, I will push hard as someone who wants virtual for a system that wont add more undue harm to those who want IPL.

I just would so appreciate the same consideration.

No. You don't get the "same consideration" after 1.5 years of closed schools. Now is the time to pour all resources into reopening schools. Parents who are risk averse can ALWAYS homeschool - which does not take much more resources than virtual.

You are so angry, and you don’t have the faintest idea of how involved homeschooling is. It’s not about the same as virtual but you either know that and don’t mind being absurd or you’re, well, I won’t meet you where you are with your anger. It’s not helping anything. I’m not your enemy. I want what’s best for my kids but don’t want to limit what you can do for yours. You aren’t the same. You don’t want me to have the ability to keep my not medically fragile 8 year old in virtual for the sake of my medically fragile 10 year old. One of my kids is exempt from IPL and one would be forced to go. There’s nothing ethical about your position. What if my healthy kid brings something home to my immunocompromised kid? What outcome for MY child are YOU comfortable with?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:PG isn’t comparable in that they don’t have half of kids attending charters. Logistically a very different story.

That makes things EASIER for DCPS.

No, offering a virtual option at every school means charters as well, and no central option for the entirety of DC.

I also think charters (and the entire lottery system, for that matter) inhibit DCPS's ability to offer strong centralized leadership as PGPS has. There are so many competing interests in DCPS, it's very hard to unite school communities behind any big idea.

I also think the way DC public schooling is structured contributes to a culture of families not really caring about each other on a basic level. You compete in a lottery for spots, even IB spots at the PK level can be competitive. And then you have school themselves competing with one another for resources. It's a system that isolates families within it. And I think that's one reason you see some of the attitudes on display on this thread and in the whole IPL versus virtual debate. There is always a sense that someone is trying to take something away from you, whether it's a slot at a school or resources or access to a program. That may not be the intention of the system, but that's the effect.

So now parents who have the means to keep their kids virtual want to do so. And I get that, honestly. If I had a way of keeping my kid out of school this year I'd be seriously considering it. The problem is that I don't have that option -- for me, it's in person public school or just sheer misery (maybe job loss, maybe a mental breakdown, it's hard to say at this point). And when I see parents agitating for virtual options in a way that feels designed to undermine in person schooling, yeah, I get anxious. Because I need in person school. Like NEED it.

I wish DCPS could figure out a way to do this that gave everyone what the wanted and needed. But I'm afraid they won't (they never do) and I don't want to wind up with the short end of the stick this time. I can't afford it, frankly.

I’m one of the virtual option proponents and I agree with almost everything you say, but would offer that I and many others I know that are pushing for virtual do not want to remove the option for IPL. In fact I don’t even want simulcast or every school to have virtual as that works less well for everyone (my view only). An irony on the other side is that those digging their heels in against virtual for others could hurt their own cause. As many have reflected expanding the virtual academy doesn’t happen easily. If we had been working on a plan B for risk averse parents, or in case things go south as they are for many schools now closing, there wohld has been much less change that the answer would be to simulcast. But I bet that’s what they’ll do. DCPS right now feels painted into a corner. They, backed by parents willing to call pandemic cautious people names “anxious” and “fear mongering” “afraid of their own shadow” were emboldened into tripling down on a poor choice. It does seem to be the Bowser administrations way (and I voted for her and want to support her, but that’s over..).

I do want to say that if there is a shift to virtual, I will push hard as someone who wants virtual for a system that wont add more undue harm to those who want IPL.

I just would so appreciate the same consideration.

No. You don't get the "same consideration" after 1.5 years of closed schools. Now is the time to pour all resources into reopening schools. Parents who are risk averse can ALWAYS homeschool - which does not take much more resources than virtual.

You are so angry, and you don’t have the faintest idea of how involved homeschooling is. It’s not about the same as virtual but you either know that and don’t mind being absurd or you’re, well, I won’t meet you where you are with your anger. It’s not helping anything. I’m not your enemy. I want what’s best for my kids but don’t want to limit what you can do for yours. You aren’t the same. You don’t want me to have the ability to keep my not medically fragile 8 year old in virtual for the sake of my medically fragile 10 year old. One of my kids is exempt from IPL and one would be forced to go. There’s nothing ethical about your position. What if my healthy kid brings something home to my immunocompromised kid? What outcome for MY child are YOU comfortable with?

Many, many of us are intimately familiar with what homeschooling involves. You are free to buy a video curriculum and have the exact same experience as last year.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:PG isn’t comparable in that they don’t have half of kids attending charters. Logistically a very different story.

That makes things EASIER for DCPS.

No, offering a virtual option at every school means charters as well, and no central option for the entirety of DC.

I also think charters (and the entire lottery system, for that matter) inhibit DCPS's ability to offer strong centralized leadership as PGPS has. There are so many competing interests in DCPS, it's very hard to unite school communities behind any big idea.

I also think the way DC public schooling is structured contributes to a culture of families not really caring about each other on a basic level. You compete in a lottery for spots, even IB spots at the PK level can be competitive. And then you have school themselves competing with one another for resources. It's a system that isolates families within it. And I think that's one reason you see some of the attitudes on display on this thread and in the whole IPL versus virtual debate. There is always a sense that someone is trying to take something away from you, whether it's a slot at a school or resources or access to a program. That may not be the intention of the system, but that's the effect.

So now parents who have the means to keep their kids virtual want to do so. And I get that, honestly. If I had a way of keeping my kid out of school this year I'd be seriously considering it. The problem is that I don't have that option -- for me, it's in person public school or just sheer misery (maybe job loss, maybe a mental breakdown, it's hard to say at this point). And when I see parents agitating for virtual options in a way that feels designed to undermine in person schooling, yeah, I get anxious. Because I need in person school. Like NEED it.

I wish DCPS could figure out a way to do this that gave everyone what the wanted and needed. But I'm afraid they won't (they never do) and I don't want to wind up with the short end of the stick this time. I can't afford it, frankly.

I’m one of the virtual option proponents and I agree with almost everything you say, but would offer that I and many others I know that are pushing for virtual do not want to remove the option for IPL. In fact I don’t even want simulcast or every school to have virtual as that works less well for everyone (my view only). An irony on the other side is that those digging their heels in against virtual for others could hurt their own cause. As many have reflected expanding the virtual academy doesn’t happen easily. If we had been working on a plan B for risk averse parents, or in case things go south as they are for many schools now closing, there wohld has been much less change that the answer would be to simulcast. But I bet that’s what they’ll do. DCPS right now feels painted into a corner. They, backed by parents willing to call pandemic cautious people names “anxious” and “fear mongering” “afraid of their own shadow” were emboldened into tripling down on a poor choice. It does seem to be the Bowser administrations way (and I voted for her and want to support her, but that’s over..).

I do want to say that if there is a shift to virtual, I will push hard as someone who wants virtual for a system that wont add more undue harm to those who want IPL.

I just would so appreciate the same consideration.

No. You don't get the "same consideration" after 1.5 years of closed schools. Now is the time to pour all resources into reopening schools. Parents who are risk averse can ALWAYS homeschool - which does not take much more resources than virtual.

You are so angry, and you don’t have the faintest idea of how involved homeschooling is. It’s not about the same as virtual but you either know that and don’t mind being absurd or you’re, well, I won’t meet you where you are with your anger. It’s not helping anything. I’m not your enemy. I want what’s best for my kids but don’t want to limit what you can do for yours. You aren’t the same. You don’t want me to have the ability to keep my not medically fragile 8 year old in virtual for the sake of my medically fragile 10 year old. One of my kids is exempt from IPL and one would be forced to go. There’s nothing ethical about your position. What if my healthy kid brings something home to my immunocompromised kid? What outcome for MY child are YOU comfortable with?

Many, many of us are intimately familiar with what homeschooling involves. You are free to buy a video curriculum and have the exact same experience as last year.

Fact: You’re the kind of person who wants to fight a worried parent of an immunocompromised kid with no options, because you think your kids in person needs are more important than my kids in person needs, you’re callous and tedious. I won’t convince you and don’t care to. You are soooo angry. Covid took your kids 2020 away, I didn’t.

[Anonymous]

Look, I think it would be fine for you to have virtual for both of your kids. But don’t claim we have no idea what homeschooling means. I am a former education researcher who specialized in unschooling and homeschooling. What happened last year was essentially a combination of both. Depended on your school offerings

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:PG isn’t comparable in that they don’t have half of kids attending charters. Logistically a very different story.

That makes things EASIER for DCPS.

No, offering a virtual option at every school means charters as well, and no central option for the entirety of DC.

I also think charters (and the entire lottery system, for that matter) inhibit DCPS's ability to offer strong centralized leadership as PGPS has. There are so many competing interests in DCPS, it's very hard to unite school communities behind any big idea.

I also think the way DC public schooling is structured contributes to a culture of families not really caring about each other on a basic level. You compete in a lottery for spots, even IB spots at the PK level can be competitive. And then you have school themselves competing with one another for resources. It's a system that isolates families within it. And I think that's one reason you see some of the attitudes on display on this thread and in the whole IPL versus virtual debate. There is always a sense that someone is trying to take something away from you, whether it's a slot at a school or resources or access to a program. That may not be the intention of the system, but that's the effect.

So now parents who have the means to keep their kids virtual want to do so. And I get that, honestly. If I had a way of keeping my kid out of school this year I'd be seriously considering it. The problem is that I don't have that option -- for me, it's in person public school or just sheer misery (maybe job loss, maybe a mental breakdown, it's hard to say at this point). And when I see parents agitating for virtual options in a way that feels designed to undermine in person schooling, yeah, I get anxious. Because I need in person school. Like NEED it.

I wish DCPS could figure out a way to do this that gave everyone what the wanted and needed. But I'm afraid they won't (they never do) and I don't want to wind up with the short end of the stick this time. I can't afford it, frankly.

I’m one of the virtual option proponents and I agree with almost everything you say, but would offer that I and many others I know that are pushing for virtual do not want to remove the option for IPL. In fact I don’t even want simulcast or every school to have virtual as that works less well for everyone (my view only). An irony on the other side is that those digging their heels in against virtual for others could hurt their own cause. As many have reflected expanding the virtual academy doesn’t happen easily. If we had been working on a plan B for risk averse parents, or in case things go south as they are for many schools now closing, there wohld has been much less change that the answer would be to simulcast. But I bet that’s what they’ll do. DCPS right now feels painted into a corner. They, backed by parents willing to call pandemic cautious people names “anxious” and “fear mongering” “afraid of their own shadow” were emboldened into tripling down on a poor choice. It does seem to be the Bowser administrations way (and I voted for her and want to support her, but that’s over..).

I do want to say that if there is a shift to virtual, I will push hard as someone who wants virtual for a system that wont add more undue harm to those who want IPL.

I just would so appreciate the same consideration.

No. You don't get the "same consideration" after 1.5 years of closed schools. Now is the time to pour all resources into reopening schools. Parents who are risk averse can ALWAYS homeschool - which does not take much more resources than virtual.

You are so angry, and you don’t have the faintest idea of how involved homeschooling is. It’s not about the same as virtual but you either know that and don’t mind being absurd or you’re, well, I won’t meet you where you are with your anger. It’s not helping anything. I’m not your enemy. I want what’s best for my kids but don’t want to limit what you can do for yours. You aren’t the same. You don’t want me to have the ability to keep my not medically fragile 8 year old in virtual for the sake of my medically fragile 10 year old. One of my kids is exempt from IPL and one would be forced to go. There’s nothing ethical about your position. What if my healthy kid brings something home to my immunocompromised kid? What outcome for MY child are YOU comfortable with?

Many, many of us are intimately familiar with what homeschooling involves. You are free to buy a video curriculum and have the exact same experience as last year.

Fact: You’re the kind of person who wants to fight a worried parent of an immunocompromised kid with no options, because you think your kids in person needs are more important than my kids in person needs, you’re callous and tedious. I won’t convince you and don’t care to. You are soooo angry. Covid took your kids 2020 away, I didn’t.

DP. That's pretty condescending of you. My kid is severely dyslexic, with a IEP since first grade. I cannot teach him because he needs specialized, in-person help that I can't provide. So my question back to you, what do you say to the worried parent of a disabled child with no options? You are worried about your child's life? Well, I'm worried about mine. This isn't "socialization" or whatever phrase you use to demean IPL. This is my kid's life and ability to survive as well.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:PG isn’t comparable in that they don’t have half of kids attending charters. Logistically a very different story.

That makes things EASIER for DCPS.

No, offering a virtual option at every school means charters as well, and no central option for the entirety of DC.

I also think charters (and the entire lottery system, for that matter) inhibit DCPS's ability to offer strong centralized leadership as PGPS has. There are so many competing interests in DCPS, it's very hard to unite school communities behind any big idea.

I also think the way DC public schooling is structured contributes to a culture of families not really caring about each other on a basic level. You compete in a lottery for spots, even IB spots at the PK level can be competitive. And then you have school themselves competing with one another for resources. It's a system that isolates families within it. And I think that's one reason you see some of the attitudes on display on this thread and in the whole IPL versus virtual debate. There is always a sense that someone is trying to take something away from you, whether it's a slot at a school or resources or access to a program. That may not be the intention of the system, but that's the effect.

So now parents who have the means to keep their kids virtual want to do so. And I get that, honestly. If I had a way of keeping my kid out of school this year I'd be seriously considering it. The problem is that I don't have that option -- for me, it's in person public school or just sheer misery (maybe job loss, maybe a mental breakdown, it's hard to say at this point). And when I see parents agitating for virtual options in a way that feels designed to undermine in person schooling, yeah, I get anxious. Because I need in person school. Like NEED it.

I wish DCPS could figure out a way to do this that gave everyone what the wanted and needed. But I'm afraid they won't (they never do) and I don't want to wind up with the short end of the stick this time. I can't afford it, frankly.

I’m one of the virtual option proponents and I agree with almost everything you say, but would offer that I and many others I know that are pushing for virtual do not want to remove the option for IPL. In fact I don’t even want simulcast or every school to have virtual as that works less well for everyone (my view only). An irony on the other side is that those digging their heels in against virtual for others could hurt their own cause. As many have reflected expanding the virtual academy doesn’t happen easily. If we had been working on a plan B for risk averse parents, or in case things go south as they are for many schools now closing, there wohld has been much less change that the answer would be to simulcast. But I bet that’s what they’ll do. DCPS right now feels painted into a corner. They, backed by parents willing to call pandemic cautious people names “anxious” and “fear mongering” “afraid of their own shadow” were emboldened into tripling down on a poor choice. It does seem to be the Bowser administrations way (and I voted for her and want to support her, but that’s over..).

I do want to say that if there is a shift to virtual, I will push hard as someone who wants virtual for a system that wont add more undue harm to those who want IPL.

I just would so appreciate the same consideration.

No. You don't get the "same consideration" after 1.5 years of closed schools. Now is the time to pour all resources into reopening schools. Parents who are risk averse can ALWAYS homeschool - which does not take much more resources than virtual.

You are so angry, and you don’t have the faintest idea of how involved homeschooling is. It’s not about the same as virtual but you either know that and don’t mind being absurd or you’re, well, I won’t meet you where you are with your anger. It’s not helping anything. I’m not your enemy. I want what’s best for my kids but don’t want to limit what you can do for yours. You aren’t the same. You don’t want me to have the ability to keep my not medically fragile 8 year old in virtual for the sake of my medically fragile 10 year old. One of my kids is exempt from IPL and one would be forced to go. There’s nothing ethical about your position. What if my healthy kid brings something home to my immunocompromised kid? What outcome for MY child are YOU comfortable with?

Many, many of us are intimately familiar with what homeschooling involves. You are free to buy a video curriculum and have the exact same experience as last year.

Fact: You’re the kind of person who wants to fight a worried parent of an immunocompromised kid with no options, because you think your kids in person needs are more important than my kids in person needs, you’re callous and tedious. I won’t convince you and don’t care to. You are soooo angry. Covid took your kids 2020 away, I didn’t.

DP. That's pretty condescending of you. My kid is severely dyslexic, with a IEP since first grade. I cannot teach him because he needs specialized, in-person help that I can't provide. So my question back to you, what do you say to the worried parent of a disabled child with no options? You are worried about your child's life? Well, I'm worried about mine. This isn't "socialization" or whatever phrase you use to demean IPL. This is my kid's life and ability to survive as well.

Allow me to repeat myself. I don’t want to take your in person away. I recognize it’s vital for your family. As virtual is for mine to keep my medically vulnerable kid safe. My healthy kid will catch and bring it home. I don’t want to lose my 10 year old child. Have a heart.

[Anonymous]

PP, I am very opposed to opt-in virtual school for "anyone who wants it" and I also think that you make an excellent case for why it is medically necessary for your family. I hope you find a path through the bureaucracy that recognizes that, in fact, a medical exemption for one child in a household should necessarily apply to all of the children in that household.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:PP, I am very opposed to opt-in virtual school for "anyone who wants it" and I also think that you make an excellent case for why it is medically necessary for your family. I hope you find a path through the bureaucracy that recognizes that, in fact, a medical exemption for one child in a household should necessarily apply to all of the children in that household.

+1

There's definitely a case to be made that the present DCPS virtual option should be extended to other children under 12 in families that have one medically fragile child that qualified for the original virtual school. This, of course, is just about DCPS and would require that a person at a charter give up their spot and attend DCPS.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:PP, I am very opposed to opt-in virtual school for "anyone who wants it" and I also think that you make an excellent case for why it is medically necessary for your family. I hope you find a path through the bureaucracy that recognizes that, in fact, a medical exemption for one child in a household should necessarily apply to all of the children in that household.

NP. I agree this is how it should be handled. And PPP, as an observer of your exchange with the other poster, I have to say that you sound A LOT angrier than the person you are calling angry. You really need to stop using this ad hominem line in your attempt to invalidate someone’s argument.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:PG isn’t comparable in that they don’t have half of kids attending charters. Logistically a very different story.

That makes things EASIER for DCPS.

No, offering a virtual option at every school means charters as well, and no central option for the entirety of DC.

I also think charters (and the entire lottery system, for that matter) inhibit DCPS's ability to offer strong centralized leadership as PGPS has. There are so many competing interests in DCPS, it's very hard to unite school communities behind any big idea.

I also think the way DC public schooling is structured contributes to a culture of families not really caring about each other on a basic level. You compete in a lottery for spots, even IB spots at the PK level can be competitive. And then you have school themselves competing with one another for resources. It's a system that isolates families within it. And I think that's one reason you see some of the attitudes on display on this thread and in the whole IPL versus virtual debate. There is always a sense that someone is trying to take something away from you, whether it's a slot at a school or resources or access to a program. That may not be the intention of the system, but that's the effect.

So now parents who have the means to keep their kids virtual want to do so. And I get that, honestly. If I had a way of keeping my kid out of school this year I'd be seriously considering it. The problem is that I don't have that option -- for me, it's in person public school or just sheer misery (maybe job loss, maybe a mental breakdown, it's hard to say at this point). And when I see parents agitating for virtual options in a way that feels designed to undermine in person schooling, yeah, I get anxious. Because I need in person school. Like NEED it.

I wish DCPS could figure out a way to do this that gave everyone what the wanted and needed. But I'm afraid they won't (they never do) and I don't want to wind up with the short end of the stick this time. I can't afford it, frankly.

I’m one of the virtual option proponents and I agree with almost everything you say, but would offer that I and many others I know that are pushing for virtual do not want to remove the option for IPL. In fact I don’t even want simulcast or every school to have virtual as that works less well for everyone (my view only). An irony on the other side is that those digging their heels in against virtual for others could hurt their own cause. As many have reflected expanding the virtual academy doesn’t happen easily. If we had been working on a plan B for risk averse parents, or in case things go south as they are for many schools now closing, there wohld has been much less change that the answer would be to simulcast. But I bet that’s what they’ll do. DCPS right now feels painted into a corner. They, backed by parents willing to call pandemic cautious people names “anxious” and “fear mongering” “afraid of their own shadow” were emboldened into tripling down on a poor choice. It does seem to be the Bowser administrations way (and I voted for her and want to support her, but that’s over..).

I do want to say that if there is a shift to virtual, I will push hard as someone who wants virtual for a system that wont add more undue harm to those who want IPL.

I just would so appreciate the same consideration.

No. You don't get the "same consideration" after 1.5 years of closed schools. Now is the time to pour all resources into reopening schools. Parents who are risk averse can ALWAYS homeschool - which does not take much more resources than virtual.

You are so angry, and you don’t have the faintest idea of how involved homeschooling is. It’s not about the same as virtual but you either know that and don’t mind being absurd or you’re, well, I won’t meet you where you are with your anger. It’s not helping anything. I’m not your enemy. I want what’s best for my kids but don’t want to limit what you can do for yours. You aren’t the same. You don’t want me to have the ability to keep my not medically fragile 8 year old in virtual for the sake of my medically fragile 10 year old. One of my kids is exempt from IPL and one would be forced to go. There’s nothing ethical about your position. What if my healthy kid brings something home to my immunocompromised kid? What outcome for MY child are YOU comfortable with?

Many, many of us are intimately familiar with what homeschooling involves. You are free to buy a video curriculum and have the exact same experience as last year.

Fact: You’re the kind of person who wants to fight a worried parent of an immunocompromised kid with no options, because you think your kids in person needs are more important than my kids in person needs, you’re callous and tedious. I won’t convince you and don’t care to. You are soooo angry. Covid took your kids 2020 away, I didn’t.

DP. That's pretty condescending of you. My kid is severely dyslexic, with a IEP since first grade. I cannot teach him because he needs specialized, in-person help that I can't provide. So my question back to you, what do you say to the worried parent of a disabled child with no options? You are worried about your child's life? Well, I'm worried about mine. This isn't "socialization" or whatever phrase you use to demean IPL. This is my kid's life and ability to survive as well.

Allow me to repeat myself. I don’t want to take your in person away. I recognize it’s vital for your family. As virtual is for mine to keep my medically vulnerable kid safe. My healthy kid will catch and bring it home. I don’t want to lose my 10 year old child. Have a heart.

Not sure why you don't enroll you children in a virtual charter.

[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:PG isn’t comparable in that they don’t have half of kids attending charters. Logistically a very different story.

That makes things EASIER for DCPS.

No, offering a virtual option at every school means charters as well, and no central option for the entirety of DC.

I also think charters (and the entire lottery system, for that matter) inhibit DCPS's ability to offer strong centralized leadership as PGPS has. There are so many competing interests in DCPS, it's very hard to unite school communities behind any big idea.

I also think the way DC public schooling is structured contributes to a culture of families not really caring about each other on a basic level. You compete in a lottery for spots, even IB spots at the PK level can be competitive. And then you have school themselves competing with one another for resources. It's a system that isolates families within it. And I think that's one reason you see some of the attitudes on display on this thread and in the whole IPL versus virtual debate. There is always a sense that someone is trying to take something away from you, whether it's a slot at a school or resources or access to a program. That may not be the intention of the system, but that's the effect.

So now parents who have the means to keep their kids virtual want to do so. And I get that, honestly. If I had a way of keeping my kid out of school this year I'd be seriously considering it. The problem is that I don't have that option -- for me, it's in person public school or just sheer misery (maybe job loss, maybe a mental breakdown, it's hard to say at this point). And when I see parents agitating for virtual options in a way that feels designed to undermine in person schooling, yeah, I get anxious. Because I need in person school. Like NEED it.

I wish DCPS could figure out a way to do this that gave everyone what the wanted and needed. But I'm afraid they won't (they never do) and I don't want to wind up with the short end of the stick this time. I can't afford it, frankly.

I’m one of the virtual option proponents and I agree with almost everything you say, but would offer that I and many others I know that are pushing for virtual do not want to remove the option for IPL. In fact I don’t even want simulcast or every school to have virtual as that works less well for everyone (my view only). An irony on the other side is that those digging their heels in against virtual for others could hurt their own cause. As many have reflected expanding the virtual academy doesn’t happen easily. If we had been working on a plan B for risk averse parents, or in case things go south as they are for many schools now closing, there wohld has been much less change that the answer would be to simulcast. But I bet that’s what they’ll do. DCPS right now feels painted into a corner. They, backed by parents willing to call pandemic cautious people names “anxious” and “fear mongering” “afraid of their own shadow” were emboldened into tripling down on a poor choice. It does seem to be the Bowser administrations way (and I voted for her and want to support her, but that’s over..).

I do want to say that if there is a shift to virtual, I will push hard as someone who wants virtual for a system that wont add more undue harm to those who want IPL.

I just would so appreciate the same consideration.

No. You don't get the "same consideration" after 1.5 years of closed schools. Now is the time to pour all resources into reopening schools. Parents who are risk averse can ALWAYS homeschool - which does not take much more resources than virtual.

You are so angry, and you don’t have the faintest idea of how involved homeschooling is. It’s not about the same as virtual but you either know that and don’t mind being absurd or you’re, well, I won’t meet you where you are with your anger. It’s not helping anything. I’m not your enemy. I want what’s best for my kids but don’t want to limit what you can do for yours. You aren’t the same. You don’t want me to have the ability to keep my not medically fragile 8 year old in virtual for the sake of my medically fragile 10 year old. One of my kids is exempt from IPL and one would be forced to go. There’s nothing ethical about your position. What if my healthy kid brings something home to my immunocompromised kid? What outcome for MY child are YOU comfortable with?

Many, many of us are intimately familiar with what homeschooling involves. You are free to buy a video curriculum and have the exact same experience as last year.

Fact: You’re the kind of person who wants to fight a worried parent of an immunocompromised kid with no options, because you think your kids in person needs are more important than my kids in person needs, you’re callous and tedious. I won’t convince you and don’t care to. You are soooo angry. Covid took your kids 2020 away, I didn’t.

DP. That's pretty condescending of you. My kid is severely dyslexic, with a IEP since first grade. I cannot teach him because he needs specialized, in-person help that I can't provide. So my question back to you, what do you say to the worried parent of a disabled child with no options? You are worried about your child's life? Well, I'm worried about mine. This isn't "socialization" or whatever phrase you use to demean IPL. This is my kid's life and ability to survive as well.

Allow me to repeat myself. I don’t want to take your in person away. I recognize it’s vital for your family. As virtual is for mine to keep my medically vulnerable kid safe. My healthy kid will catch and bring it home. I don’t want to lose my 10 year old child. Have a heart.

Not sure why you don't enroll you children in a virtual charter.

NP. Because they are FULL!

[Anonymous]

Reality check. It's Friday. School starts Monday. What are people going to do? I don't think there's going to suddenly be a virtual option for anyone who wants it. Maybe there will be some expansion for situations some PPs above described, like siblings of medically fragile students?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Look, I think it would be fine for you to have virtual for both of your kids. But don’t claim we have no idea what homeschooling means. I am a former education researcher who specialized in unschooling and homeschooling. What happened last year was essentially a combination of both. Depended on your school offerings

How many people unschool in the DMV?

[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:PG isn’t comparable in that they don’t have half of kids attending charters. Logistically a very different story.

That makes things EASIER for DCPS.

No, offering a virtual option at every school means charters as well, and no central option for the entirety of DC.

I also think charters (and the entire lottery system, for that matter) inhibit DCPS's ability to offer strong centralized leadership as PGPS has. There are so many competing interests in DCPS, it's very hard to unite school communities behind any big idea.

I also think the way DC public schooling is structured contributes to a culture of families not really caring about each other on a basic level. You compete in a lottery for spots, even IB spots at the PK level can be competitive. And then you have school themselves competing with one another for resources. It's a system that isolates families within it. And I think that's one reason you see some of the attitudes on display on this thread and in the whole IPL versus virtual debate. There is always a sense that someone is trying to take something away from you, whether it's a slot at a school or resources or access to a program. That may not be the intention of the system, but that's the effect.

So now parents who have the means to keep their kids virtual want to do so. And I get that, honestly. If I had a way of keeping my kid out of school this year I'd be seriously considering it. The problem is that I don't have that option -- for me, it's in person public school or just sheer misery (maybe job loss, maybe a mental breakdown, it's hard to say at this point). And when I see parents agitating for virtual options in a way that feels designed to undermine in person schooling, yeah, I get anxious. Because I need in person school. Like NEED it.

I wish DCPS could figure out a way to do this that gave everyone what the wanted and needed. But I'm afraid they won't (they never do) and I don't want to wind up with the short end of the stick this time. I can't afford it, frankly.

I’m one of the virtual option proponents and I agree with almost everything you say, but would offer that I and many others I know that are pushing for virtual do not want to remove the option for IPL. In fact I don’t even want simulcast or every school to have virtual as that works less well for everyone (my view only). An irony on the other side is that those digging their heels in against virtual for others could hurt their own cause. As many have reflected expanding the virtual academy doesn’t happen easily. If we had been working on a plan B for risk averse parents, or in case things go south as they are for many schools now closing, there wohld has been much less change that the answer would be to simulcast. But I bet that’s what they’ll do. DCPS right now feels painted into a corner. They, backed by parents willing to call pandemic cautious people names “anxious” and “fear mongering” “afraid of their own shadow” were emboldened into tripling down on a poor choice. It does seem to be the Bowser administrations way (and I voted for her and want to support her, but that’s over..).

I do want to say that if there is a shift to virtual, I will push hard as someone who wants virtual for a system that wont add more undue harm to those who want IPL.

I just would so appreciate the same consideration.

No. You don't get the "same consideration" after 1.5 years of closed schools. Now is the time to pour all resources into reopening schools. Parents who are risk averse can ALWAYS homeschool - which does not take much more resources than virtual.

You are so angry, and you don’t have the faintest idea of how involved homeschooling is. It’s not about the same as virtual but you either know that and don’t mind being absurd or you’re, well, I won’t meet you where you are with your anger. It’s not helping anything. I’m not your enemy. I want what’s best for my kids but don’t want to limit what you can do for yours. You aren’t the same. You don’t want me to have the ability to keep my not medically fragile 8 year old in virtual for the sake of my medically fragile 10 year old. One of my kids is exempt from IPL and one would be forced to go. There’s nothing ethical about your position. What if my healthy kid brings something home to my immunocompromised kid? What outcome for MY child are YOU comfortable with?

Many, many of us are intimately familiar with what homeschooling involves. You are free to buy a video curriculum and have the exact same experience as last year.

Fact: You’re the kind of person who wants to fight a worried parent of an immunocompromised kid with no options, because you think your kids in person needs are more important than my kids in person needs, you’re callous and tedious. I won’t convince you and don’t care to. You are soooo angry. Covid took your kids 2020 away, I didn’t.

DP. That's pretty condescending of you. My kid is severely dyslexic, with a IEP since first grade. I cannot teach him because he needs specialized, in-person help that I can't provide. So my question back to you, what do you say to the worried parent of a disabled child with no options? You are worried about your child's life? Well, I'm worried about mine. This isn't "socialization" or whatever phrase you use to demean IPL. This is my kid's life and ability to survive as well.

Allow me to repeat myself. I don’t want to take your in person away. I recognize it’s vital for your family. As virtual is for mine to keep my medically vulnerable kid safe. My healthy kid will catch and bring it home. I don’t want to lose my 10 year old child. Have a heart.

Not sure why you don't enroll you children in a virtual charter.

NP. Because they are FULL!

They are not full. Enrollment and waitlists are being cleared daily.

[Anonymous]

There seem to be a lot of people who can put together petitions and do a lot of advocacy work for a virtual option (whatever that means; I personally don't know any more since there are virtual options) but who claim they can't figure out homeschool.