Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I 100% agree the virtual should be separate but I don't think one should ever say "well you always had this crap option before so that is what you should get now." We should always be looking looking at ways to improve education for vulnerable students and this includes medical vulnerability.

Again I 100% dont think there should be concurrent teacher but see no problem with working to develop a robust separate virtual or traveling homebound teachers.

What about Virtual Virginia, though? Doesn’t it already exist?

DP. The online charter schools/online public schools usually get good reviews from parents BUT - they are basically parent-led homeschooling with a curriculum and materials provided to the families. So it requires a lot of parental involvement and families have to apply and be accepted and agree to support their kids’ schooling. Districts are very reluctant to push families into Virtual Virginia because of the parental involvement. It’s very different than the school’s distance learning which is live with a teacher on Google Meets (or whatever each district uses).

They could create a centralized distance learning option, however, that would be county-wide. Some parents wouldn’t like that because their students wouldn’t necessarily get a teacher/classmates from their base school, but it seems the fairest way to do things at this point. The in person kids get a live, in person education with a real teacher in class, not a monitor; and the online kids get the same with a dedicated online teacher.

I think the schools should provide an all virtual option, but it certainly doesn't need to be tied to each specific school. The argument that kids in option schools should be able to stay there is crazy. OK, let them back in if they want to be in person, but don't create a virtual school for each school if the numbers don't warrant it. Look at how many want all virtual and assign the proper number of teachers county-wide. Don't assign kids randomly. Make clusters, like they do for summer school programs. So, schools A,B,C & D all feed into one virtual program. Doing that around the county still keeps kids clustered with others from either their school of an adjacent school. It would make the transition back to all in-person easier. But, so say that they need precious option school virtual options is ridiculous.

Anonymous wrote:I 100% agree the virtual should be separate but I don't think one should ever say "well you always had this crap option before so that is what you should get now." We should always be looking looking at ways to improve education for vulnerable students and this includes medical vulnerability.

Again I 100% dont think there should be concurrent teacher but see no problem with working to develop a robust separate virtual or traveling homebound teachers.

What about Virtual Virginia, though? Doesn’t it already exist?

I 100% agree the virtual should be separate but I don't think one should ever say "well you always had this crap option before so that is what you should get now." We should always be looking looking at ways to improve education for vulnerable students and this includes medical vulnerability.

Again I 100% dont think there should be concurrent teacher but see no problem with working to develop a robust separate virtual or traveling homebound teachers.

It’s called homeschooling. There are plenty of certified programs to choose from. Stop dragging the rest of us down.

Anonymous wrote:I believe that there is a law signed that schools must offer a virtual option for the 21-22 school year. That could be outsourcing like virtual Virginia or their own program.

If a student had a health issue previously such as surgery or illness where they would be out for more than 2 weeks, they would qualify for homeboound services under section 504 (we could qualify a student due to their current health condition preventing them from attending school with documentation) or if they already had an IEP.

I don’t believe there will be concurrent next year, I’m an APS teacher. But it will greatly depend on the number of students who want it.

That all makes sense. If kids were required to qualify for 504, I’m guessing the number in actuality would be low (this would eliminate anyone with compromised family members, elderly concerns, etc bc the student would have to be the one with the condition). This year it’s about “wanting” virtual, next year should be about “needing” to be virtual.

I believe that there is a law signed that schools must offer a virtual option for the 21-22 school year. That could be outsourcing like virtual Virginia or their own program.

If a student had a health issue previously such as surgery or illness where they would be out for more than 2 weeks, they would qualify for homeboound services under section 504 (we could qualify a student due to their current health condition preventing them from attending school with documentation) or if they already had an IEP.

I don’t believe there will be concurrent next year, I’m an APS teacher. But it will greatly depend on the number of students who want it.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’m pre-Covid times, if a student was unable to attend school in person (say, for cancer treatment), what did they do?

Next year, if your child can’t (or won’t) attend school in person for one reason or another, why should this change?

It’s not up to APS to spend money they don’t have and force teachers to do twice the work to accommodate your child’s every wish. There should be a county-wide virtual program for those that don’t go in.

Why should there be even that? When the pandemic is over and everything reopens no way should anyone allow virtual school to remain an option

The pandemic won’t be over next year.

Once it’s endemic it will be handled like the flu.

Agreed OP. Kids got the flu, strep, and it spread throughout the classroom. Kids that were sick stayed home, others went in and the sick kids had work to make up. This will be exactly what we will deal with in the future with covid.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’m pre-Covid times, if a student was unable to attend school in person (say, for cancer treatment), what did they do?

Next year, if your child can’t (or won’t) attend school in person for one reason or another, why should this change?

It’s not up to APS to spend money they don’t have and force teachers to do twice the work to accommodate your child’s every wish. There should be a county-wide virtual program for those that don’t go in.

Why should there be even that? When the pandemic is over and everything reopens no way should anyone allow virtual school to remain an option

The pandemic won’t be over next year.

Anonymous wrote:I’m pre-Covid times, if a student was unable to attend school in person (say, for cancer treatment), what did they do?

Next year, if your child can’t (or won’t) attend school in person for one reason or another, why should this change?

It’s not up to APS to spend money they don’t have and force teachers to do twice the work to accommodate your child’s every wish. There should be a county-wide virtual program for those that don’t go in.

Why should there be even that? When the pandemic is over and everything reopens no way should anyone allow virtual school to remain an option

Anonymous wrote:They have homebound services where a traveling teacher comes 1-3ish times per week. Teachers send home work.

Ok, so not the concurrent option that some of you are suggesting.

I’m down with a traveling teacher once a week and homework packets being sent home. It just seems like a county-wide virtual program might offer better quality instruction than that.

They have homebound services where a traveling teacher comes 1-3ish times per week. Teachers send home work.

Totally agree. The AEM trolls will fight this hard though. The discourse there has really gone off the rails.

I’m pre-Covid times, if a student was unable to attend school in person (say, for cancer treatment), what did they do?

Next year, if your child can’t (or won’t) attend school in person for one reason or another, why should this change?

It’s not up to APS to spend money they don’t have and force teachers to do twice the work to accommodate your child’s every wish. There should be a county-wide virtual program for those that don’t go in.