Rumors of a delay?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Honestly, the only issues going on here are that: (i) there are teachers (not all, for sure, but a sizeable group) who don’t want to take any risk despite it being part of their job, the risk being super small, and the cost-benefit highly weighing in favor of going back and (ii) there are parents bitter that their kid didn’t get an inperson spot. As a result, both groups are taking active measures to sabotage any opening for the child who absolutely need it the most, thereby continuing the increasing exponential risk that these kids are in. In short, selfish people are screwing over disadvantaged children, yet again.

THIS.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Honestly, the only issues going on here are that: (i) there are teachers (not all, for sure, but a sizeable group) who don’t want to take any risk despite it being part of their job, the risk being super small, and the cost-benefit highly weighing in favor of going back and (ii) there are parents bitter that their kid didn’t get an inperson spot. As a result, both groups are taking active measures to sabotage any opening for the child who absolutely need it the most, thereby continuing the increasing exponential risk that these kids are in. In short, selfish people are screwing over disadvantaged children, yet again.

THIS!!! Parent of SN kids here. This is also why I oppose any WTU suggestions to delay opening to gather input from teachers and parents. My kids and others NEED this plan now. These loud-mouthed parents sabotaging this didn't get an in-person spot and aren't interested in CARES because they have better options. So they're sabotaging it for our at risk kids who need this.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Honestly, the only issues going on here are that: (i) there are teachers (not all, for sure, but a sizeable group) who don’t want to take any risk despite it being part of their job, the risk being super small, and the cost-benefit highly weighing in favor of going back and (ii) there are parents bitter that their kid didn’t get an inperson spot. As a result, both groups are taking active measures to sabotage any opening for the child who absolutely need it the most, thereby continuing the increasing exponential risk that these kids are in. In short, selfish people are screwing over disadvantaged children, yet again.

THIS.

Well, except that the plan also includes taking support from one group of students and weakening classroom teaching for another all to help a very small minority, and not even all the kids who need it the most.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Honestly, the only issues going on here are that: (i) there are teachers (not all, for sure, but a sizeable group) who don’t want to take any risk despite it being part of their job, the risk being super small, and the cost-benefit highly weighing in favor of going back and (ii) there are parents bitter that their kid didn’t get an inperson spot. As a result, both groups are taking active measures to sabotage any opening for the child who absolutely need it the most, thereby continuing the increasing exponential risk that these kids are in. In short, selfish people are screwing over disadvantaged children, yet again.

THIS!!! Parent of SN kids here. This is also why I oppose any WTU suggestions to delay opening to gather input from teachers and parents. My kids and others NEED this plan now. These loud-mouthed parents sabotaging this didn't get an in-person spot and aren't interested in CARES because they have better options. So they're sabotaging it for our at risk kids who need this.

But what happens if your SN kid doesn't get in via the lottery?? Then they are SOL with even worse teacher/student ratios.

[Anonymous]

My SN kid needs it too and didn’t get an in person spot. Get over yourself. There are many more kids that NEED in person spots and are regressing other than yours. This plan ignores them.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:My SN kid needs it too and didn’t get an in person spot. Get over yourself. There are many more kids that NEED in person spots and are regressing other than yours. This plan ignores them.

100%.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My SN kid needs it too and didn’t get an in person spot. Get over yourself. There are many more kids that NEED in person spots and are regressing other than yours. This plan ignores them.

100%.

My SN is in SELF CONTAINED and didn't get a spot. People need to look at the bigger picture, it's not just about your child. This plan SUCKS.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:My SN kid needs it too and didn’t get an in person spot. Get over yourself. There are many more kids that NEED in person spots and are regressing other than yours. This plan ignores them.

Maybe. But don't forget that the WTU doesn't want to go back at all. So the only people trying to get kids back are DCPS. Hopefully the piloting of small classes will pave the way for your child to go back too. My SN did get a spot, and I'm hoping that this will lead to more in-person classes. Or, I would be happy to wait another term for everyone to go back next term. But again - that is not what WTU is fighting for.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My SN kid needs it too and didn’t get an in person spot. Get over yourself. There are many more kids that NEED in person spots and are regressing other than yours. This plan ignores them.

100%.

My SN is in SELF CONTAINED and didn't get a spot. People need to look at the bigger picture, it's not just about your child. This plan SUCKS.

The self-contained lottery didn't happen yet (or results haven't been sent as of yet).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My SN kid needs it too and didn’t get an in person spot. Get over yourself. There are many more kids that NEED in person spots and are regressing other than yours. This plan ignores them.

Maybe. But don't forget that the WTU doesn't want to go back at all. So the only people trying to get kids back are DCPS. Hopefully the piloting of small classes will pave the way for your child to go back too. My SN did get a spot, and I'm hoping that this will lead to more in-person classes. Or, I would be happy to wait another term for everyone to go back next term. But again - that is not what WTU is fighting for.

Are you advocating for this plan or just trying to get people to point fingers at WTU? Two different goals.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My SN kid needs it too and didn’t get an in person spot. Get over yourself. There are many more kids that NEED in person spots and are regressing other than yours. This plan ignores them.

Maybe. But don't forget that the WTU doesn't want to go back at all. So the only people trying to get kids back are DCPS. Hopefully the piloting of small classes will pave the way for your child to go back too. My SN did get a spot, and I'm hoping that this will lead to more in-person classes. Or, I would be happy to wait another term for everyone to go back next term. But again - that is not what WTU is fighting for.

Funny how winners always like the process.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My SN kid needs it too and didn’t get an in person spot. Get over yourself. There are many more kids that NEED in person spots and are regressing other than yours. This plan ignores them.

Maybe. But don't forget that the WTU doesn't want to go back at all. So the only people trying to get kids back are DCPS. Hopefully the piloting of small classes will pave the way for your child to go back too. My SN did get a spot, and I'm hoping that this will lead to more in-person classes. Or, I would be happy to wait another term for everyone to go back next term. But again - that is not what WTU is fighting for.

For the 97th time, the 5 day/week, full-day schedule for in-person and the ill-conceived CARE classrooms preclude anybody else going back all yesr.

This plan is not a pilot, it is a dead end.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My SN kid needs it too and didn’t get an in person spot. Get over yourself. There are many more kids that NEED in person spots and are regressing other than yours. This plan ignores them.

Maybe. But don't forget that the WTU doesn't want to go back at all. So the only people trying to get kids back are DCPS. Hopefully the piloting of small classes will pave the way for your child to go back too. My SN did get a spot, and I'm hoping that this will lead to more in-person classes. Or, I would be happy to wait another term for everyone to go back next term. But again - that is not what WTU is fighting for.

For the 97th time, the 5 day/week, full-day schedule for in-person and the ill-conceived CARE classrooms preclude anybody else going back all yesr.

This plan is not a pilot, it is a dead end.

Why is that? (Agree its not a pilot)

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My SN kid needs it too and didn’t get an in person spot. Get over yourself. There are many more kids that NEED in person spots and are regressing other than yours. This plan ignores them.

Maybe. But don't forget that the WTU doesn't want to go back at all. So the only people trying to get kids back are DCPS. Hopefully the piloting of small classes will pave the way for your child to go back too. My SN did get a spot, and I'm hoping that this will lead to more in-person classes. Or, I would be happy to wait another term for everyone to go back next term. But again - that is not what WTU is fighting for.

For the 97th time, the 5 day/week, full-day schedule for in-person and the ill-conceived CARE classrooms preclude anybody else going back all yesr.

This plan is not a pilot, it is a dead end.

Why is that? (Agree its not a pilot)

This is what I think too. The rest of the SN kids and the NT are screwed.

[Anonymous]

What does NT stand for?