HoCo considering virtual-only option next year

[Anonymous]

They haven't decided what 2021-2022 will be yet (in-person, virtual or hybrid), but they're going to hold info sessions on virtual-only options.

I guess I'm not surprised, but I am bummed that they're already going down this route. Bah humbug

[Anonymous]

Having options is not the same as adopting them.

While I understand that they are being thorough, with the prevalence of vaccinations, it looks like the majority of the state will be vaccinated by late July, early August, in time for return to school. With the big learning gap between the FARMS, ESL, and lower-income households in the county and Dr Martirano's emphasis on trying to close the education gap, I can't imagine that there will not be, at a minimum, a hybrid learning plan. There are many disadvantaged families that are being hurt academically from the virtual learning. I think placing a priority on health and safety is a good thing and I'm glad that the school district kept virtual as long as possible and that the virtual option is still available for many of us, but I really can't see any point to an ALL virtual program for next school year. It will most probably be some form of hybrid, but I imagine that the majority of students will be back in-person with options for some to be virtual.

[Anonymous]

Good for them.

[Anonymous]

That's smart. Otherwise those families are going to be pushing the schools to stay closed.

[Anonymous]

I think most schools, at least around here, will have virtual options next year because (at least for a decent chunk of the year) lots of kids won't be able to vaccinations.

I imagine that, rather than having teachers simultaneously teach in-person and virtual (as many schools are doing now) more places will have separate classes with separate teachers for kids in-person and DL. The hard part will be if people want to switch in-person after vaccinations and/or if numbers go down a lot.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:They haven't decided what 2021-2022 will be yet (in-person, virtual or hybrid), but they're going to hold info sessions on virtual-only options.

I guess I'm not surprised, but I am bummed that they're already going down this route. Bah humbug

I think that Maryland schools need to do what most states in the country have and develop a robust virtual option where you select at the beginning of the year or semester and then you're locked in, barring special circumstances where you have to petition. (e.g. if you start chemo, you can move to virtual. If your parent who was supervising your online learning starts chemo you can move to in person).

It would reduce numbers in public schools, and allow for some social distancing, reduce the voices advocating for virtual for everyone, and would get rid of the concurrent nonsense. Then the kids who choose in person could commit to doing as much in person as is safe. I'm hopeful that 5 days a week is safe, but even if it's 2 and 2, there are more options when you know you'll see all of your kids in person then there currently are.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They haven't decided what 2021-2022 will be yet (in-person, virtual or hybrid), but they're going to hold info sessions on virtual-only options.

I guess I'm not surprised, but I am bummed that they're already going down this route. Bah humbug

I think that Maryland schools need to do what most states in the country have and develop a robust virtual option where you select at the beginning of the year or semester and then you're locked in, barring special circumstances where you have to petition. (e.g. if you start chemo, you can move to virtual. If your parent who was supervising your online learning starts chemo you can move to in person).

It would reduce numbers in public schools, and allow for some social distancing, reduce the voices advocating for virtual for everyone, and would get rid of the concurrent nonsense. Then the kids who choose in person could commit to doing as much in person as is safe. I'm hopeful that 5 days a week is safe, but even if it's 2 and 2, there are more options when you know you'll see all of your kids in person then there currently are.

I agree, but think that DL only students should be locked in, preferably for the entire year which would make staffing easier.

One thing I don't agree with is the idea of allowing DL only students to remain with their assigned schools, including for activities and sports. I would support this option for those students who cannot learn in person due to high risk health conditions or because of a particular need that makes DL inappropriate. However, for students who just want DL because they like it better (or want to sleep later), there should be different activities for those DL only students. Otherwise, the DL option is not really addressing overcrowding issues and could make them worse.

[Anonymous]

Adding to the post above about activities to clarify the reason I think that DL students by choice should have their own activities or be assigned to a school with a smaller population. at least for high school. Some high schools in Howard County have hundreds, even 500 more than others. But there is only one JV and varsity sports team, school play, etc. If activity participation for DL high school students could be assigned to the schools with smaller populations, that might address the inequities associated with the larger and over enrolled schools.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They haven't decided what 2021-2022 will be yet (in-person, virtual or hybrid), but they're going to hold info sessions on virtual-only options.

I guess I'm not surprised, but I am bummed that they're already going down this route. Bah humbug

I think that Maryland schools need to do what most states in the country have and develop a robust virtual option where you select at the beginning of the year or semester and then you're locked in, barring special circumstances where you have to petition. (e.g. if you start chemo, you can move to virtual. If your parent who was supervising your online learning starts chemo you can move to in person).

It would reduce numbers in public schools, and allow for some social distancing, reduce the voices advocating for virtual for everyone, and would get rid of the concurrent nonsense. Then the kids who choose in person could commit to doing as much in person as is safe. I'm hopeful that 5 days a week is safe, but even if it's 2 and 2, there are more options when you know you'll see all of your kids in person then there currently are.

I agree, but think that DL only students should be locked in, preferably for the entire year which would make staffing easier.

One thing I don't agree with is the idea of allowing DL only students to remain with their assigned schools, including for activities and sports. I would support this option for those students who cannot learn in person due to high risk health conditions or because of a particular need that makes DL inappropriate. However, for students who just want DL because they like it better (or want to sleep later), there should be different activities for those DL only students. Otherwise, the DL option is not really addressing overcrowding issues and could make them worse.

It would make staffing easier, but I don't think schools will be that restrictive. I would imagine, at the very least, gaining eligibility for the vaccine would be a reason to change circumstances.

As for outside of schools activities, it seems punitive to exclude kids from that and I'd be surprised if that were the rules established.

If, once we get past 21-22, schools choose to make a limited DL option available, I could see schools having stricter policies related thereto -- although I am still not sure they would keep kids out of extracurriculars. But for this coming year, when a lot will still be influx in terms of Covid and vaccines, I think they will have to be more flexible.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They haven't decided what 2021-2022 will be yet (in-person, virtual or hybrid), but they're going to hold info sessions on virtual-only options.

I guess I'm not surprised, but I am bummed that they're already going down this route. Bah humbug

I think that Maryland schools need to do what most states in the country have and develop a robust virtual option where you select at the beginning of the year or semester and then you're locked in, barring special circumstances where you have to petition. (e.g. if you start chemo, you can move to virtual. If your parent who was supervising your online learning starts chemo you can move to in person).

It would reduce numbers in public schools, and allow for some social distancing, reduce the voices advocating for virtual for everyone, and would get rid of the concurrent nonsense. Then the kids who choose in person could commit to doing as much in person as is safe. I'm hopeful that 5 days a week is safe, but even if it's 2 and 2, there are more options when you know you'll see all of your kids in person then there currently are.

I agree, but think that DL only students should be locked in, preferably for the entire year which would make staffing easier.

One thing I don't agree with is the idea of allowing DL only students to remain with their assigned schools, including for activities and sports. I would support this option for those students who cannot learn in person due to high risk health conditions or because of a particular need that makes DL inappropriate. However, for students who just want DL because they like it better (or want to sleep later), there should be different activities for those DL only students. Otherwise, the DL option is not really addressing overcrowding issues and could make them worse.

It would make staffing easier, but I don't think schools will be that restrictive. I would imagine, at the very least, gaining eligibility for the vaccine would be a reason to change circumstances.

As for outside of schools activities, it seems punitive to exclude kids from that and I'd be surprised if that were the rules established.

If, once we get past 21-22, schools choose to make a limited DL option available, I could see schools having stricter policies related thereto -- although I am still not sure they would keep kids out of extracurriculars. But for this coming year, when a lot will still be influx in terms of Covid and vaccines, I think they will have to be more flexible.

PP you responded to. That makes sense for next year. I wouldn't object. I was thinking more long term. I love the idea of having DL for certain students who need it and for making it an option for those who learn better that way. But I also think there has to be a tradeoff in terms of taking the good with the bad for both options long term.

[Anonymous]

OP why are you upset about this? How will it affect your children? It sounds like it's an option, not mandatory.

MCPS has long had an virtual school option for children who for whatever reason could not physically be at school. My child has been one of those the last couple of years for health reasons, and it would be a relief knowing they might not be so alone if some of their classmates decide to do DL next year, too.

[Anonymous]

It's called PLANNING.

When you're an organization or a government, part of your job is to plan all eventualities, even ones that you think might not happen.

The likelihood of virtual options in the fall is decreasing with rapid vaccination progress. Unless a super-variant emerges that is resistant to our vaccines, I think every school will be back is session full time, with masks for those who wish to stay safer, and injunctions to not touch others, but no other distancing requirements.

But I still support all orgs to plan for a virtual option! Cover all the bases.

[Anonymous]

If you are interested in hearing about the Digital Learning plans for 2021-2022, there is an upcoming information session.

Note that the virtual learning plan is not intended for all students, but is intended to be an auxiliary plan concurrent with in-person learning.

https://www.facebook.com/events/267126754959625/

Details
Event by Howard County Public School System
Online Event
Wednesday, March 31, 2021 at 7 PM – 8 PM
Price: Free · Duration: 1 hr
Public · Anyone on or off Facebook
HCPSS is considering a virtual school option for students entering grades K-12 who wish to continue learning virtually for the 2021-2022 school year. Once finalized, the Digital Education Center (DEC) program will give students the opportunity to take all classes and earn credits virtually, while receiving support services from the student’s districted home school. The DEC is intended to function as an additional, separate K-12 school, which will continue to operate even after fully in-person learning resumes at all other HCPSS schools.
HCPSS students and families interested in learning about the DEC option can register to attend a virtual information session Wednesday, March 31 at 1 or 7 p.m.
Full details and to register for a session: https://news.hcpss.org/news-posts/2021/03/hcpss-dec-virtual-information-sessions-march-31-2021/?fbclid=IwAR2mS64sEjhuhBYRMLL13uaAOE9XsJFh0UQ60OY4SOu-3IvMO_ag9tzHd0o

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They haven't decided what 2021-2022 will be yet (in-person, virtual or hybrid), but they're going to hold info sessions on virtual-only options.

I guess I'm not surprised, but I am bummed that they're already going down this route. Bah humbug

I think that Maryland schools need to do what most states in the country have and develop a robust virtual option where you select at the beginning of the year or semester and then you're locked in, barring special circumstances where you have to petition. (e.g. if you start chemo, you can move to virtual. If your parent who was supervising your online learning starts chemo you can move to in person).

It would reduce numbers in public schools, and allow for some social distancing, reduce the voices advocating for virtual for everyone, and would get rid of the concurrent nonsense. Then the kids who choose in person could commit to doing as much in person as is safe. I'm hopeful that 5 days a week is safe, but even if it's 2 and 2, there are more options when you know you'll see all of your kids in person then there currently are.

I agree, but think that DL only students should be locked in, preferably for the entire year which would make staffing easier.

One thing I don't agree with is the idea of allowing DL only students to remain with their assigned schools, including for activities and sports. I would support this option for those students who cannot learn in person due to high risk health conditions or because of a particular need that makes DL inappropriate. However, for students who just want DL because they like it better (or want to sleep later), there should be different activities for those DL only students. Otherwise, the DL option is not really addressing overcrowding issues and could make them worse.

Um okay. You hate DL students and want them to be punished. Got it.

[Anonymous]

They should have offered a virtual school many years ago like they do in other states. However, I don't think we should build our own model but should use digital providers who already do this for other states / districts. I will send my kid in person but think online options should have been available years ago.