Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:School is child care. Many parents relied on their kids being out of the house for the school day and teachers handling everything education related. Now people have to step up and parent and do things like assure the assignments are done and make sure their kids go to class. Its pretty sad that some parents were never involved in the first place.

School is not childcare. Parents "relied" on free babysitting incorrectly. They made an assumption that they were entitled to babysitting in addition to education. That assumption was incorrect.

Of course they did but people cannot be responsible or involved with their own kids so its turned into free babysitting. It must be such a shock to them to have to spend so much time with them now.

I’m sure the more unpleasant the child is, the more angry the parents have been over school being virtual. I’m in no rush to shove my kids out into an un heated classroom.

Anonymous wrote:School is child care. Many parents relied on their kids being out of the house for the school day and teachers handling everything education related. Now people have to step up and parent and do things like assure the assignments are done and make sure their kids go to class. Its pretty sad that some parents were never involved in the first place.

Many of us parent were highly involved before the pandemic, and it's still incredibly difficult to manage kids' schooling along with jobs and everything else. Most other countries prioritized young children's schools being open, so it's not a ridiculous idea to expect that.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:School is child care. Many parents relied on their kids being out of the house for the school day and teachers handling everything education related. Now people have to step up and parent and do things like assure the assignments are done and make sure their kids go to class. Its pretty sad that some parents were never involved in the first place.

It's amazing how easily many people have pivoted from "Ugh, these helicopter parents always wanting to interfere in what goes on in the classroom, why can't they let teachers do their jobs?" to "Ugh, these lazy parents who don't have the time or ability to oversee every single second of their child's school day, why can't they get involved?"

Truly, just [chef's kiss].

Anonymous wrote:School is child care. Many parents relied on their kids being out of the house for the school day and teachers handling everything education related. Now people have to step up and parent and do things like assure the assignments are done and make sure their kids go to class. Its pretty sad that some parents were never involved in the first place.

It's amazing how easily many people have pivoted from "Ugh, these helicopter parents always wanting to interfere in what goes on in the classroom, why can't they let teachers do their jobs?" to "Ugh, these lazy parents who don't have the time or ability to oversee every single second of their child's school day, why can't they get involved?"

Truly, just [chef's kiss].

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:School is child care. Many parents relied on their kids being out of the house for the school day and teachers handling everything education related. Now people have to step up and parent and do things like assure the assignments are done and make sure their kids go to class. Its pretty sad that some parents were never involved in the first place.

School is not childcare. Parents "relied" on free babysitting incorrectly. They made an assumption that they were entitled to babysitting in addition to education. That assumption was incorrect.

Of course they did but people cannot be responsible or involved with their own kids so its turned into free babysitting. It must be such a shock to them to have to spend so much time with them now.

Anonymous wrote:School is child care. Many parents relied on their kids being out of the house for the school day and teachers handling everything education related. Now people have to step up and parent and do things like assure the assignments are done and make sure their kids go to class. Its pretty sad that some parents were never involved in the first place.

School is not childcare. Parents "relied" on free babysitting incorrectly. They made an assumption that they were entitled to babysitting in addition to education. That assumption was incorrect.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:To all those complaining that parents only see schools as babysitters and who want schools open so that they don't have to pay for childcare - why aren't you thinking about the large number of families who cannot pay for childcare?? Most of the upper middle class can figure this out and pay for alternatives. Those that are more financially challenged can also figure this out, but can't afford this option or for other reasons it may not be as easily solved.

So when you start hating on all parents for wanting schools back in, for any reason, please note that you are hating on some very vulnerable people in our society. The ones that can't afford tutors, who can't be one of the 2 million women who have dropped out of the workforce, the ones that technology does not come as easy to, etc.

I see this on so many posts and I can't imagine the liberally focused majority on this board can't open their minds to this....

If they can’t afford kids, shouldn’t have had them. It’s a choice to be a parent. They were irresponsible. Teachers did not force them to reproduce even though it didn’t fit their lifestyle.

If they didn't want to teach children in schools, they shouldn't have become public school teachers. It's a choice to be a teacher. They were irresponsible. Parents didn't force them to get education degrees and take jobs in public schools, even though the job didn't fit their lifestyle.

It's truly disgusting how people who think like this are allowed to spew such selfishness and hatred towards their fellow citizens, and of course the anonymity of the internet gives them complete coverage, but *****ism has made it fashionable to be nasty, brutish nd proud. Those children that were born are here now, regardless of whether you deem them deserving of birth. And it's society responsibility to take care of them, or risk dealing with the crime, desperation and poverty that will eventually characterize them as adults (as well as the human capital you are sacrificing from neglecting millions of future productive citizens). Every other advanced society knows this, they invest in all of their children rather than let the selfishness of a small percent of greedy parents dictate public policy, and we wonder why America is slowly collapsing.

The silver lining in all of this is that all the cracks in our messed up socioeconomic system is being exposed and I think most people are starting to see how stupid and exploitative it was to turn schools into babysitting arenas in the first place by creating unequal tax systems, and forcing families to have to bring in two incomes just to scrape by in the first place.

No, it's THEIR PARENTS' job to take care of them. The schools' job is to provide education. They are providing education. Take care of the children you chose to bring into the world.

School is child care. Many parents relied on their kids being out of the house for the school day and teachers handling everything education related. Now people have to step up and parent and do things like assure the assignments are done and make sure their kids go to class. Its pretty sad that some parents were never involved in the first place.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The effects of DL long term (as we are at this point) on kids will not be known until this is over and the studies will begin. I have no doubt the damage done to kids will be astronomical. And no, I do t need or want a babysitter. Nor do I want to pay any person who thinks they are doing me a favor by doing the job they are paid to do. Or not, as the case stands.

When the world has time to reflect, teachers In the DMV are not going to look good. Other parts of this country and the world - yes. DMV - no.

10 weeks is not long-term. 10 weeks of short-term. We will not be able to measure substantial loss from this time period.

What are you talking about with ten weeks? In March it will be a year.

There is going to be measurable and IMO permanent and severe educational loss from DL.

This is one of the craziest posts I have read on this forum in quite a while.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Consider this argument.

https://medium.com/@bsteele595/school-is-not-daycare-308ae73b2135

Counterpoint: https://www.nytimes.com/2020/10/13/opinion/coronavirus-schools-child-care-centers.html

Of course school, particularly elementary school, is a form of childcare. Teachers' feelings don't really matter on that front. It's not an emotional argument, it's a practical one. Whether they like it or not, teachers do provide care for children while educating them.

And teachers really, really need to move away from insulting childcare providers. It's not a good look, at best. I won't get into what it says, at worst.

If school is childcare, then I expect to be refunded for my degrees (both undergrad and the required masters degree), as childcare providers are not required to hold degrees. I also won’t waste any more of my off time doing work for the classroom, and you can settle for knowing that your children will come home alive at the end of the day. We can have snacks, play outside, read a story, do a craft. What a tremendous relief from the pressures of preparing students for tests or meeting standards! No more differentiation for students with special needs, fine motor delays, or ENL kids. I sure won’t be writing legal documents, attending meetings, doing paperwork, grading, or designing curriculum. Thank you for unburdening the nation’s teachers.

Actually some child care providers do hold degrees. In some counties, a masters is required.

Where is it required for childcare providers to have a masters?

MCPS. We were at a prek-2nd grade and our school preferred it but all were college educated. You sound really consenting.

Preferred, not required. I would prefer if my barista had a masters but again it's not required to make my coffee.

Anonymous wrote:The effects of DL long term (as we are at this point) on kids will not be known until this is over and the studies will begin. I have no doubt the damage done to kids will be astronomical. And no, I do t need or want a babysitter. Nor do I want to pay any person who thinks they are doing me a favor by doing the job they are paid to do. Or not, as the case stands.

When the world has time to reflect, teachers In the DMV are not going to look good. Other parts of this country and the world - yes. DMV - no.

10 weeks is not long-term. 10 weeks of short-term. We will not be able to measure substantial loss from this time period.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Op, I don't agree, but those people will just say: "They shouldn't have had kids if the couldn't afford childcare." Only upper middle class people are entitled to reproduce I suppose.

Kids are a luxury item. They are expensive. I cannot afford a Range Rover although I really want one. I can afford a Toyota Corolla though so that’s what I have. I really want 3 kids but I can’t afford them so I only have one. It’s called personal responsibility.

So no one should have children unless one parent can stay home? I assume that's your logical conclusion to this.

And btw, children are not a luxury. They are actually a fundamental part of human existence, without which we could not survive nor provide for our aging population.

If you cannot afford one, don’t have one. Period. I’m not talking about this year. I’m talking about all of the time. If I couldn’t afford one, I would figure out what I needed to do to afford one. Maybe a second job. Maybe it down on expenses. Maybe both. Other people should not fund other people’s inability to plan and have some personal responsibility.

So let's get rid of all social safety net programs then.

Exactly. Kids are not luxury handbags only the rich can afford. Kids deserve life and they deserve not to be treated like crap just because they aren't born into riches or "worthy" parents.

That same poster will be making the argument when they are 75 how all those irresponsibly-born kids should be taking care of them and yelling for their social security. But with that argument, older people should just all be burned in incinerators when they hit 50 or 60 (depending on when they hit menopause/start to lose their faculties or physical performance) because they won't have as much to offer society as a 20, 30, or 40-something. In fact, it would be irresponsible to keep parents and grandparents alive beyond a certain age unless you can pay for them from your own pockets. Cause why should the rest of society have to pay to keep them alive? How irresponsible not to "take care" of them with a pistol out back.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:To all those complaining that parents only see schools as babysitters and who want schools open so that they don't have to pay for childcare - why aren't you thinking about the large number of families who cannot pay for childcare?? Most of the upper middle class can figure this out and pay for alternatives. Those that are more financially challenged can also figure this out, but can't afford this option or for other reasons it may not be as easily solved.

So when you start hating on all parents for wanting schools back in, for any reason, please note that you are hating on some very vulnerable people in our society. The ones that can't afford tutors, who can't be one of the 2 million women who have dropped out of the workforce, the ones that technology does not come as easy to, etc.

I see this on so many posts and I can't imagine the liberally focused majority on this board can't open their minds to this....

If they can’t afford kids, shouldn’t have had them. It’s a choice to be a parent. They were irresponsible. Teachers did not force them to reproduce even though it didn’t fit their lifestyle.

If they didn't want to teach children in schools, they shouldn't have become public school teachers. It's a choice to be a teacher. They were irresponsible. Parents didn't force them to get education degrees and take jobs in public schools, even though the job didn't fit their lifestyle.

It's truly disgusting how people who think like this are allowed to spew such selfishness and hatred towards their fellow citizens, and of course the anonymity of the internet gives them complete coverage, but Trumpism has made it fashionable to be nasty, brutish nd proud. Those children that were born are here now, regardless of whether you deem them deserving of birth. And it's society responsibility to take care of them, or risk dealing with the crime, desperation and poverty that will eventually characterize them as adults (as well as the human capital you are sacrificing from neglecting millions of future productive citizens). Every other advanced society knows this, they invest in all of their children rather than let the selfishness of a small percent of greedy parents dictate public policy, and we wonder why America is slowly collapsing.

The silver lining in all of this is that all the cracks in our messed up socioeconomic system is being exposed and I think most people are starting to see how stupid and exploitative it was to turn schools into babysitting arenas in the first place by creating unequal tax systems, and forcing families to have to bring in two incomes just to scrape by in the first place.

Anonymous wrote:It is shocking to me how many teachers were posting these “I’m not a babysitter” positions online. It’s totally ridiculous and classist. I have always been a staunch public school supporter and I will never blindly support teachers again.

+1

I've always been a public school supporter, but I find the use of this phrase and "school is not childcare" to be appalling.