Anonymous wrote:Our private school is having in-person BTSN and I'm really disappointed, it was a zoo every year for the teachers to give a 10-min commentary, no time for questions and then the cattle call to go to the next room. Virtual was so much easier.

Anonymous wrote:Unless I'm missing something, the law does NOT limit how many members of the public can attend virtually. It requires members of a public body (eg school board members) to be present in person. I think this is ok.

My only concern is that for really small, hyper-local public bodies, serving as a member actually is a pretty big committment, generally as a volunteer when you have a day job. In those cases, allowing the meetings to be virtual probably expands the number and type of people willing to serve as members.

But for school board, etc? Yeah, I'm ok with this.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why/how would this apply to Virginia PTAs?

The law appears to apply to public bodies. I don't think that includes PTAs. In DC there's something called an "LSAT" that is established in law and includes teachers, parents, and community members. That type of school meeting might be covered if there is a Virginia equivalent.

Probably does apply to PTA meetings bc PTA meetings are open to the public. If you want to attend a PTA meeting at any school you could. I attended one for the elementary school my child was going to attend before they attended. It was a good way to get a feel for the school.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why/how would this apply to Virginia PTAs?

The law appears to apply to public bodies. I don't think that includes PTAs. In DC there's something called an "LSAT" that is established in law and includes teachers, parents, and community members. That type of school meeting might be covered if there is a Virginia equivalent.

Anonymous wrote:Why/how would this apply to Virginia PTAs?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I see both sides.

Large attendance online meetings and school events are not ideal for virtual and neither are issues or topics where you're trying to have a thoughtful and dynamic conversation among a lot of people. It can be done but it's hard. There is zero accountability to show even basic decency of engaging and paying attention and a whole bunch of people half listen with their cameras turned off. It's just so flat compared to an in-person experience where people are forced to engage and behave respectfully and "show up". It's also not fun to be the presenter speaking into the void or trying to facilitate a conversation during one of these large group setups. I've done it a bunch. But definitely a lot more convenient.

If you can get critical mass to return voluntarily (or I guess force them to return), then there is a tipping point where the overall quality of the conversation and presentation goes up for everybody.

And doing the events hybrid well is also fairly challenging for the people who have to plan the logistics. From having done these hybrid events, the online people are often checked out and don't participate at the same level as people in person. Which is pretty normal. Different energy in the room with the live humans.

That may all be true. Nonetheless, greater participation is a plus.
It seems ridiculous to limit the # of times an individual can participate via zoom. I think many people participating virtually are less likely to be more vocal or engaged in person anyway. The zoom option at least loops people in who otherwise would never loop in or engage. The more people aware of discussions and what's going on in their school or community, the better - they'll engage when they find something important enough, or maybe they'll step up for a small volunteer role they otherwise never would have considered doing.

Everyone in-person isn't always particularly engaged or contributory to discussions. I think it's the right move to require in-person meetings again; but it's just part of the typical conservative type efforts to diminish participation by a wider and more diverse group. Think about it: who is more likely to attend in-person PTA or Board meetings, and who is more likely to take the log-in option?

Anonymous wrote:I see both sides.

Large attendance online meetings and school events are not ideal for virtual and neither are issues or topics where you're trying to have a thoughtful and dynamic conversation among a lot of people. It can be done but it's hard. There is zero accountability to show even basic decency of engaging and paying attention and a whole bunch of people half listen with their cameras turned off. It's just so flat compared to an in-person experience where people are forced to engage and behave respectfully and "show up". It's also not fun to be the presenter speaking into the void or trying to facilitate a conversation during one of these large group setups. I've done it a bunch. But definitely a lot more convenient.

If you can get critical mass to return voluntarily (or I guess force them to return), then there is a tipping point where the overall quality of the conversation and presentation goes up for everybody.

And doing the events hybrid well is also fairly challenging for the people who have to plan the logistics. From having done these hybrid events, the online people are often checked out and don't participate at the same level as people in person. Which is pretty normal. Different energy in the room with the live humans.

Anonymous wrote:Middle school back to school night is during practice time for many sports. It was awesome the past couple years when I could logon from the parking lot or home in between carpooling. How do we get the information if we don’t go? Are there PowerPoint or something?