Anonymous wrote:I don't want to do it forever. But to be honest, I really like hybrid school. Our kids are in school 2 days a week and we have a tutor come the other 3. I wouldn't mind doing another year of this.

It feels like the perfect blend of having them out of the house/getting a break and then having them home and being able to spend quality time with them.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I do not want a permanent DL option supported. I think that raises severe equity and segregation issues, and it routes funding to a population that needs it least.

Honestly, I don’t either. It’s not what the public schools are good at and it’s not consistent with their mission for the long term. I WOULD like to see lessons learned in virtual — where it has better served ASD and SN kids for example — taken back to the physical classroom. Long term, resources should be focused on making the in-school experience equitably optimal for all kinds of kids.

Except some SN families are saying DL is better. So, why do you feel the need to dismiss an educational plan that is working for them. If your kids return to school and others, choose not to, that helps kids in person as there is less overcrowding and more attention given to the in person students. The goal should be meeting all kids needs and in person one size fits all doesn't work for all kids and families. It takes nothing away from your kids going in person to set up a DL school for kids who are doing well at it. I would have loved DL for ES for my SN child. We could have focused more on private therapies and supplement and more importantly provide the needed support that school refused despite us trying.

Most posters have mentioned using DL for medical and special needs kids with specific needs served by DL (as well as home and hospital). The objection is to DL for anyone who wants it. Many of us question whether a parallel DL model is an appropriate use of resources that will benefit the students who need it most.

Why do you care? Really, it does not impact you.

DP. Yes, it does, especially if the DL academies become a way to segregate out some children (which is something that pro-DL posters are open about on DCUM). I don't want funding going to this.

How would it segregate kids? Kids are segregated by income (which then leads to race) now so how would DL be any different? You are making it about your wishes, not others. You do what is best for your kids, which is in person as they have a rough home life and others of us will get the option when its safe to return on if we want to continue DL vs. in person or a hybrid depending on what is offered. Why are you threatened by families choosing DL? Because you can't make it work for your kids? Mine do well in both environments. I see a lot of opportunity in offering DL and hybrid including fixing the overcrowding issues and getting classes not offered at your home school. My child will have to be driven or bussed for 8th grade math. Much prefer DL then being a classroom of high schoolers who are a few years older.

You got it exactly. The more people screech against DL the more I know that their kids are miserable at home because of their parents. So for those kids I do hope they get back to school. But for those families where they have stable, committed parents, where they don't have the same sense of urgency and don't need to be unsafe in the midst of the pandemic, then they can do DL because it IS working for them.

Going to school with a mask is not unsafe.

You know kids eat two meals a day at school, right? And teachers are required to provide multiple “mask breaks”? There is no masking with fidelity in schools. That’s a fantasy.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I do not want a permanent DL option supported. I think that raises severe equity and segregation issues, and it routes funding to a population that needs it least.

Honestly, I don’t either. It’s not what the public schools are good at and it’s not consistent with their mission for the long term. I WOULD like to see lessons learned in virtual — where it has better served ASD and SN kids for example — taken back to the physical classroom. Long term, resources should be focused on making the in-school experience equitably optimal for all kinds of kids.

Except some SN families are saying DL is better. So, why do you feel the need to dismiss an educational plan that is working for them. If your kids return to school and others, choose not to, that helps kids in person as there is less overcrowding and more attention given to the in person students. The goal should be meeting all kids needs and in person one size fits all doesn't work for all kids and families. It takes nothing away from your kids going in person to set up a DL school for kids who are doing well at it. I would have loved DL for ES for my SN child. We could have focused more on private therapies and supplement and more importantly provide the needed support that school refused despite us trying.

Most posters have mentioned using DL for medical and special needs kids with specific needs served by DL (as well as home and hospital). The objection is to DL for anyone who wants it. Many of us question whether a parallel DL model is an appropriate use of resources that will benefit the students who need it most.

Why do you care? Really, it does not impact you.

DP. Yes, it does, especially if the DL academies become a way to segregate out some children (which is something that pro-DL posters are open about on DCUM). I don't want funding going to this.

How would it segregate kids? Kids are segregated by income (which then leads to race) now so how would DL be any different? You are making it about your wishes, not others. You do what is best for your kids, which is in person as they have a rough home life and others of us will get the option when its safe to return on if we want to continue DL vs. in person or a hybrid depending on what is offered. Why are you threatened by families choosing DL? Because you can't make it work for your kids? Mine do well in both environments. I see a lot of opportunity in offering DL and hybrid including fixing the overcrowding issues and getting classes not offered at your home school. My child will have to be driven or bussed for 8th grade math. Much prefer DL then being a classroom of high schoolers who are a few years older.

You got it exactly. The more people screech against DL the more I know that their kids are miserable at home because of their parents. So for those kids I do hope they get back to school. But for those families where they have stable, committed parents, where they don't have the same sense of urgency and don't need to be unsafe in the midst of the pandemic, then they can do DL because it IS working for them.

Going to school with a mask is not unsafe.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I do not want a permanent DL option supported. I think that raises severe equity and segregation issues, and it routes funding to a population that needs it least.

Honestly, I don’t either. It’s not what the public schools are good at and it’s not consistent with their mission for the long term. I WOULD like to see lessons learned in virtual — where it has better served ASD and SN kids for example — taken back to the physical classroom. Long term, resources should be focused on making the in-school experience equitably optimal for all kinds of kids.

Except some SN families are saying DL is better. So, why do you feel the need to dismiss an educational plan that is working for them. If your kids return to school and others, choose not to, that helps kids in person as there is less overcrowding and more attention given to the in person students. The goal should be meeting all kids needs and in person one size fits all doesn't work for all kids and families. It takes nothing away from your kids going in person to set up a DL school for kids who are doing well at it. I would have loved DL for ES for my SN child. We could have focused more on private therapies and supplement and more importantly provide the needed support that school refused despite us trying.

Most posters have mentioned using DL for medical and special needs kids with specific needs served by DL (as well as home and hospital). The objection is to DL for anyone who wants it. Many of us question whether a parallel DL model is an appropriate use of resources that will benefit the students who need it most.

Why do you care? Really, it does not impact you.

DP. Yes, it does, especially if the DL academies become a way to segregate out some children (which is something that pro-DL posters are open about on DCUM). I don't want funding going to this.

How would it segregate kids? Kids are segregated by income (which then leads to race) now so how would DL be any different? You are making it about your wishes, not others. You do what is best for your kids, which is in person as they have a rough home life and others of us will get the option when its safe to return on if we want to continue DL vs. in person or a hybrid depending on what is offered. Why are you threatened by families choosing DL? Because you can't make it work for your kids? Mine do well in both environments. I see a lot of opportunity in offering DL and hybrid including fixing the overcrowding issues and getting classes not offered at your home school. My child will have to be driven or bussed for 8th grade math. Much prefer DL then being a classroom of high schoolers who are a few years older.

You got it exactly. The more people screech against DL the more I know that their kids are miserable at home because of their parents. So for those kids I do hope they get back to school. But for those families where they have stable, committed parents, where they don't have the same sense of urgency and don't need to be unsafe in the midst of the pandemic, then they can do DL because it IS working for them.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:In every county there seems to be a cohort of parents that fight tooth and nail for DL for their kids. I don't understand this. The vaccine is out. The vaccine is the answer to herd immunity. Masks work.

Question for these parents: What year will you be comfortable sending your kids into school? 2023? 2024? 2025? Never?

Are you honestly expecting 100% eradication of this virus?

They don't want it "forever," but you are being disingenuous and you already knew that.

Start with vaccinations for kids.

Oh, and mind your own business.

START with vaccination for kids? And then what?

First it was flatten the curve, then case rates, then vaccines for teachers, then vaccines for teacher family members and parents, then ventilation upgrades even when those concerns were already addressed but HEY! an increase from 4-6 ACH is .00005% better, and now it’s kid vaccines.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If you want your kids at hime forever, that’s fine. That option has always existed — it’s called homeschooling. The local school system should not have to continue to pour resources into online learning after this school year because some parents want to keep their kids home. There are virtual schools and many states have their own virtual public school. The local district should not have to spend money to keep providing this.

This is what it has always been about. Wealthier white families who are afraid that the minority kids at home are siphoning resources from their own kids.
There are kids in my class who have lost multiple family members to COVID. They have parents who don’t speak English, who work in fast food and public transit and in housekeeping. Some of these kids have parents who are illiterate even in their own language. You have absolutely no right to dictate how funds are allocated to students like this. Do you understand how devastating it will be to these families if their child brings home COVID to grandma and an infant? They don’t have insurance. Some live in shelters or in crowded low income housing. They can’t isolate a sick family member in a cozy bedroom like you can.

I’m embarrassed for the people who pretended to care about these children months ago. They pretended to advocate for these families until they finally realized that they don’t, in fact, want to send their kids back to school mid pandemic. They were always a prop, and now they’re back to being an obstacle to Charlotte’s flute lessons. Vile.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Are you all aware there are already public online schools in many states? In Virginia it's Virginia Virtual Academy and in DC it's Friendship Online Academy. I'm not sure about Maryland; there is a Maryland Virtual Academy, but I am not sure it is a free online charter school. These options are already out there for parents who want long-term DL without individual schools or school districts reinventing the wheel. You are just not connected to your local school.

It's not just because of COVID - many athletes in sports like figure skating need a lot of schedule flexibility during the day and do these programs. Some kids are badly bullied at their local schools or learn better without classroom distractions. My kids are in Virginia Virtual Academy and will probably remain there for next year.

Yep, this, and there is no need to stay connected to your local school if you are never going to enter the classroom. You could have a teacher from Alaska and it wouldn’t matter.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If you want your kids at hime forever, that’s fine. That option has always existed — it’s called homeschooling. The local school system should not have to continue to pour resources into online learning after this school year because some parents want to keep their kids home. There are virtual schools and many states have their own virtual public school. The local district should not have to spend money to keep providing this.

This is what it has always been about. Wealthier white families who are afraid that the minority kids at home are siphoning resources from their own kids.
There are kids in my class who have lost multiple family members to COVID. They have parents who don’t speak English, who work in fast food and public transit and in housekeeping. Some of these kids have parents who are illiterate even in their own language. You have absolutely no right to dictate how funds are allocated to students like this. Do you understand how devastating it will be to these families if their child brings home COVID to grandma and an infant? They don’t have insurance. Some live in shelters or in crowded low income housing. They can’t isolate a sick family member in a cozy bedroom like you can.

I’m embarrassed for the people who pretended to care about these children months ago. They pretended to advocate for these families until they finally realized that they don’t, in fact, want to send their kids back to school mid pandemic. They were always a prop, and now they’re back to being an obstacle to Charlotte’s flute lessons. Vile.

Anonymous wrote:If you want your kids at hime forever, that’s fine. That option has always existed — it’s called homeschooling. The local school system should not have to continue to pour resources into online learning after this school year because some parents want to keep their kids home. There are virtual schools and many states have their own virtual public school. The local district should not have to spend money to keep providing this.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:In every county there seems to be a cohort of parents that fight tooth and nail for DL for their kids. I don't understand this. The vaccine is out. The vaccine is the answer to herd immunity. Masks work.

Question for these parents: What year will you be comfortable sending your kids into school? 2023? 2024? 2025? Never?

Are you honestly expecting 100% eradication of this virus?

They don't want it "forever," but you are being disingenuous and you already knew that.

Start with vaccinations for kids.

Oh, and mind your own business.

START with vaccination for kids? And then what?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't want my kids to "DL forever" but we aren't out of the Covid woods yet, and most parents haven't been able to get a vaccine. As well as some teachers.

See the new CDC directors message today. Too many mask freedum people, and too few vaccines, are leading to another potential surge. It usually takes a pandemic like this 3 years to burn thru the population (see 1918), hopefully with the vaccine that will be shortened, as long as people take it.

Send your kids back if you want.

Feel free to keep yours home, in DL if offered or homeschool if not. If you opt for DL, your kids should not be permitted to participate in any in person activities.

I’m so glad that whether they can participate will not be decided by you nasty, selfish keyboard warrior parents.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I do not want a permanent DL option supported. I think that raises severe equity and segregation issues, and it routes funding to a population that needs it least.

Honestly, I don’t either. It’s not what the public schools are good at and it’s not consistent with their mission for the long term. I WOULD like to see lessons learned in virtual — where it has better served ASD and SN kids for example — taken back to the physical classroom. Long term, resources should be focused on making the in-school experience equitably optimal for all kinds of kids.

Except some SN families are saying DL is better. So, why do you feel the need to dismiss an educational plan that is working for them. If your kids return to school and others, choose not to, that helps kids in person as there is less overcrowding and more attention given to the in person students. The goal should be meeting all kids needs and in person one size fits all doesn't work for all kids and families. It takes nothing away from your kids going in person to set up a DL school for kids who are doing well at it. I would have loved DL for ES for my SN child. We could have focused more on private therapies and supplement and more importantly provide the needed support that school refused despite us trying.

Most posters have mentioned using DL for medical and special needs kids with specific needs served by DL (as well as home and hospital). The objection is to DL for anyone who wants it. Many of us question whether a parallel DL model is an appropriate use of resources that will benefit the students who need it most.

Why do you care? Really, it does not impact you.

DP. Yes, it does, especially if the DL academies become a way to segregate out some children (which is something that pro-DL posters are open about on DCUM). I don't want funding going to this.

How would it segregate kids? Kids are segregated by income (which then leads to race) now so how would DL be any different? You are making it about your wishes, not others. You do what is best for your kids, which is in person as they have a rough home life and others of us will get the option when its safe to return on if we want to continue DL vs. in person or a hybrid depending on what is offered. Why are you threatened by families choosing DL? Because you can't make it work for your kids? Mine do well in both environments. I see a lot of opportunity in offering DL and hybrid including fixing the overcrowding issues and getting classes not offered at your home school. My child will have to be driven or bussed for 8th grade math. Much prefer DL then being a classroom of high schoolers who are a few years older.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't want my kids to "DL forever" but we aren't out of the Covid woods yet, and most parents haven't been able to get a vaccine. As well as some teachers.

See the new CDC directors message today. Too many mask freedum people, and too few vaccines, are leading to another potential surge. It usually takes a pandemic like this 3 years to burn thru the population (see 1918), hopefully with the vaccine that will be shortened, as long as people take it.

Send your kids back if you want.

Feel free to keep yours home, in DL if offered or homeschool if not. If you opt for DL, your kids should not be permitted to participate in any in person activities.

I’m so glad that whether they can participate will not be decided by you nasty, selfish keyboard warrior parents.