DC should end remote option - for charter and DCPS

[Anonymous]

NYC just announced there will be no remote option in the fall. Hopefully DC follows suit ... and the Mayor should also somehow exercise her authority over charters as well, if at all possible.

[Anonymous]

I think they should have/expand one online school option not connected to any DCPS.

And the default should be in person schooling. The end.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I think they should have/expand one online school option not connected to any DCPS.

And the default should be in person schooling. The end.

Any parents who truly feel they need online can enroll in Friendship Online.

[Anonymous]

+1

[Anonymous]

I 100% agree, and also think there's no way my kid's charter will see the light and not offer virtual in the fall (based on a year of misguided decisions at every turn).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I 100% agree, and also think there's no way my kid's charter will see the light and not offer virtual in the fall (based on a year of misguided decisions at every turn).

Charter parents need to get together and file a lawsuit. I would start now - don’t wait til fall.

[Anonymous]

Our charter has told us that DC (OSSE?) has restricted virtual to only IEP/504 situations beginning in the fall. Can't independently verify or share a link, but that is what they are saying.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Our charter has told us that DC (OSSE?) has restricted virtual to only IEP/504 situations beginning in the fall. Can't independently verify or share a link, but that is what they are saying.

those students need to go through the established Home and Hospital placement after they have gone through all the proper steps to get an IEP or 504. No “opting out” of in person just because a parent claims the child is “immunocompromised.”

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Our charter has told us that DC (OSSE?) has restricted virtual to only IEP/504 situations beginning in the fall. Can't independently verify or share a link, but that is what they are saying.

That's encouraging. Our charter has said nothing.

[Anonymous]

I also thought remote option should be dropped entirely too. But then I started thinking that if in the fall unvaccinated kids are still being told to be tested and stay home after travel or after being in contact with someone known to have COVID, then it's unfair to take away remote option when that would prevent keeping those quarantined students from missing school. At the very least I would hope schools will treat those days as async school days rather than absences.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I also thought remote option should be dropped entirely too. But then I started thinking that if in the fall unvaccinated kids are still being told to be tested and stay home after travel or after being in contact with someone known to have COVID, then it's unfair to take away remote option when that would prevent keeping those quarantined students from missing school. At the very least I would hope schools will treat those days as async school days rather than absences.

Well, even if they do have to offer remote options, at least they can have a dedicated teacher instead of having the poor teachers simulcast.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I also thought remote option should be dropped entirely too. But then I started thinking that if in the fall unvaccinated kids are still being told to be tested and stay home after travel or after being in contact with someone known to have COVID, then it's unfair to take away remote option when that would prevent keeping those quarantined students from missing school. At the very least I would hope schools will treat those days as async school days rather than absences.

Well, even if they do have to offer remote options, at least they can have a dedicated teacher instead of having the poor teachers simulcast.

Any teacher who is teaching in-person should have ZERO responsibilities to provide virtual school. Which is why the virtual option should be limited and via either a secondary provider or some kind of centralized office with a separate teaching staff.

We aren't going to have any teachers left if we make teaching so miserable no one wants to do it. And that's what "hybrid teaching" is -- just an absolutely miserable experience where teachers have to work twice as hard to deliver a subpar education to their students. That's demoralizing and miserable. Any teacher who is showing up to the classroom should get to finally just teach their kids in the classroom. It's what we should have been doing for much of this year except during the peak of the pandemic.

[Anonymous]

Nope

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Our charter has told us that DC (OSSE?) has restricted virtual to only IEP/504 situations beginning in the fall. Can't independently verify or share a link, but that is what they are saying.

those students need to go through the established Home and Hospital placement after they have gone through all the proper steps to get an IEP or 504. No “opting out” of in person just because a parent claims the child is “immunocompromised.”

+100

This program has always been available and there are criteria a student needs to meet. They should just continue with that program. I’ve had students with severe autoimmune diseases who did HHP before COVID, they should have that option now.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I also thought remote option should be dropped entirely too. But then I started thinking that if in the fall unvaccinated kids are still being told to be tested and stay home after travel or after being in contact with someone known to have COVID, then it's unfair to take away remote option when that would prevent keeping those quarantined students from missing school. At the very least I would hope schools will treat those days as async school days rather than absences.

Well, even if they do have to offer remote options, at least they can have a dedicated teacher instead of having the poor teachers simulcast.

Any teacher who is teaching in-person should have ZERO responsibilities to provide virtual school. Which is why the virtual option should be limited and via either a secondary provider or some kind of centralized office with a separate teaching staff.

We aren't going to have any teachers left if we make teaching so miserable no one wants to do it. And that's what "hybrid teaching" is -- just an absolutely miserable experience where teachers have to work twice as hard to deliver a subpar education to their students. That's demoralizing and miserable. Any teacher who is showing up to the classroom should get to finally just teach their kids in the classroom. It's what we should have been doing for much of this year except during the peak of the pandemic.

Right. Hence the PP's point that any remote option should be a dedicated teacher and not an in-classroom teacher.