Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:ES parent here. Our teachers most definitely did not follow the rules. My child had a new math lesson with new content today. Plus new homework supporting that content.

Good. After a year of learning loss, creating 15 more days on learning loss and justifying it in a public school based on religion is ridiculous. The sooner someone challenges this 100% illegal setup, the better.

It’s actually only 11 days, but ok.

And for kids on a block schedule in MS/HS, it’s 22 days. Which is not okay.

No it’s not. Math is not your strong suit. First of all, there are only a total only of 11 O days for the 21-22 school year. Not sure how you extrapolate to 22. A teacher on here explained it a while ago too. It’s 5 days on A days, and 6 days on B days. This is for the whole year. So it balances out.

They can be catch up days. Give the kids a break.

Do you have little kids?

Middle and high school are on the block schedule.

They only have 4 classes per day.

The MS and HS schedules alternate between A days and B days.

A and B days cover the same material every 2 days.

So if AB chemistry has a zero day on the Monday A day, then AP chemistry that meets on B days cannot move forward on the material.

11 days becomes 22 days of no learning for HS and MS.

Yes, I was right. You really aren’t getting it. Teachers are not going to hold the other class back on B day just because A day was an O day. They will be off by a few lessons. Big deal.

It actually is a big deal. If you were a teacher, you would know that. Science classes do labs. If I get off sync by even a few days, that means running multiple lab set ups at the same time. Quizzes and tests get offset by multiple days. That means early kids don't get their quizzes returned until all can take it. Tests get offset by days. Students get confused when they ask what is going on in class and are told something different by friends on the other day. It really is quite challenging to juggle all this. These first 2 observance days are close enough and on opposite days, so it is workable to shift things to only have one day for each group affected. Won't always be possible though.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So pretty much what we expected - a useless day at school. For our 1 MS and 1 HS kids it was - a movie in history class, a Kahoot followed by free time in Health, a non-graded quiz followed by free time in Geometry, finish any unfinished work followed by free time in Chemistry.

Only what 12 more days like this? Yay can’t wait

Wait until the snow days kick in. This is what you should have been fighting the SB on versus calling teachers lazy mother****.

Yeah thanks but some of us never called the teachers names and have always understood the issue is the school board and superintendent. It’s why we transferred our youngest to private.

January is going to be super fun with 2 O days right, after 2 week winter break, plus a holiday, 2 teacher workdays, and 1 early release day

We’re planning ski trips in January for that reason. Between the O days and work days we should be able to ski 2-3 times. If FCPS is gonna tell parents in advance no meaningful learning will happen they should be prepared for a lot families to just decide to have their kids absent those days.

Jew here and I will let the SB know my views. I think no tests or quizzes is ENOUGH. They also should post all notes for new materials taught that day and not have notes with a question that they answered in class, but did not post the answer too. Make it easy to catch up, but there is no reason to avoid teaching new material.

If they must do things this new way then those days could absolutely be reviewing for a quiz with study guide work, Kahut, or allowing time to work on individual papers/projects and get help from the teacher.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:11 days of no learning is outrageous. Just so a couple kids don't get behind? Are you serious?

It really isn’t a big deal. Kids can work on long term projects, which can be started before the O day. It forces the teacher to actually plan better to account for these days.

And besides, the school year started two weeks earlier this year. Unclench.

My kids didn't do any of that on Tuesday. It sounded like it was basically a day of treading water. The O days in principle are a good idea - it's the ban on any sort of useful thing happening that day that's a huge problem.

for 2022/2023 year they should:

1. Dial back the number of O days slightly

2. Allow for teaching of new content on those days and the introduction of new projects BUT teachers MUST convey the material in written form too so that those not in school to hear it orally can catch up. They could also tape themselves if they rather and share the link. Frankly, this should be best practice already because kids miss school for all sorts of things including being sick or quarantining. Being out sick still means missing school - same as missing it for a religious day - and the kids need to be able to catch up.

3. Better protocols for making up ALL missed days (whether sick or religious day)

4. No tests those days but evals like of reading levels that can just be done for the missing kid on another day should be allowed.

5. No one-time-thing like school musical try-outs or graduation, etc. but activities that happen a ton of times like sports events, practices, clubs, etc should be allowed to happen. Again, kids miss for all sorts of things and missing one game is not the end of the world.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:11 days of no learning is outrageous. Just so a couple kids don't get behind? Are you serious?

It really isn’t a big deal. Kids can work on long term projects, which can be started before the O day. It forces the teacher to actually plan better to account for these days.

And besides, the school year started two weeks earlier this year. Unclench.

+1

Anonymous wrote:11 days of no learning is outrageous. Just so a couple kids don't get behind? Are you serious?

It really isn’t a big deal. Kids can work on long term projects, which can be started before the O day. It forces the teacher to actually plan better to account for these days.

And besides, the school year started two weeks earlier this year. Unclench.

11 days of no learning is outrageous. Just so a couple kids don't get behind? Are you serious?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:ES parent here. Our teachers most definitely did not follow the rules. My child had a new math lesson with new content today. Plus new homework supporting that content.

Good. After a year of learning loss, creating 15 more days on learning loss and justifying it in a public school based on religion is ridiculous. The sooner someone challenges this 100% illegal setup, the better.

It’s actually only 11 days, but ok.

And for kids on a block schedule in MS/HS, it’s 22 days. Which is not okay.

No it’s not. Math is not your strong suit. First of all, there are only a total only of 11 O days for the 21-22 school year. Not sure how you extrapolate to 22. A teacher on here explained it a while ago too. It’s 5 days on A days, and 6 days on B days. This is for the whole year. So it balances out.

They can be catch up days. Give the kids a break.

Do you have little kids?

Middle and high school are on the block schedule.

They only have 4 classes per day.

The MS and HS schedules alternate between A days and B days.

A and B days cover the same material every 2 days.

So if AB chemistry has a zero day on the Monday A day, then AP chemistry that meets on B days cannot move forward on the material.

11 days becomes 22 days of no learning for HS and MS.

Nope, it’s still just 5 days for A day kids and 6 days for B day kids.

+1 no one section of kids is missing 22 days. Lol.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:ES parent here. Our teachers most definitely did not follow the rules. My child had a new math lesson with new content today. Plus new homework supporting that content.

Good. After a year of learning loss, creating 15 more days on learning loss and justifying it in a public school based on religion is ridiculous. The sooner someone challenges this 100% illegal setup, the better.

It’s actually only 11 days, but ok.

And for kids on a block schedule in MS/HS, it’s 22 days. Which is not okay.

No it’s not. Math is not your strong suit. First of all, there are only a total only of 11 O days for the 21-22 school year. Not sure how you extrapolate to 22. A teacher on here explained it a while ago too. It’s 5 days on A days, and 6 days on B days. This is for the whole year. So it balances out.

They can be catch up days. Give the kids a break.

Do you have little kids?

Middle and high school are on the block schedule.

They only have 4 classes per day.

The MS and HS schedules alternate between A days and B days.

A and B days cover the same material every 2 days.

So if AB chemistry has a zero day on the Monday A day, then AP chemistry that meets on B days cannot move forward on the material.

11 days becomes 22 days of no learning for HS and MS.

Nope, it’s still just 5 days for A day kids and 6 days for B day kids.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:ES parent here. Our teachers most definitely did not follow the rules. My child had a new math lesson with new content today. Plus new homework supporting that content.

Good. After a year of learning loss, creating 15 more days on learning loss and justifying it in a public school based on religion is ridiculous. The sooner someone challenges this 100% illegal setup, the better.

It’s actually only 11 days, but ok.

And for kids on a block schedule in MS/HS, it’s 22 days. Which is not okay.

No it’s not. Math is not your strong suit. First of all, there are only a total only of 11 O days for the 21-22 school year. Not sure how you extrapolate to 22. A teacher on here explained it a while ago too. It’s 5 days on A days, and 6 days on B days. This is for the whole year. So it balances out.

They can be catch up days. Give the kids a break.

Do you have little kids?

Middle and high school are on the block schedule.

They only have 4 classes per day.

The MS and HS schedules alternate between A days and B days.

A and B days cover the same material every 2 days.

So if AB chemistry has a zero day on the Monday A day, then AP chemistry that meets on B days cannot move forward on the material.

11 days becomes 22 days of no learning for HS and MS.

I teach AP. I’m not keeping classes in sync this year. I mapped out the whole year, and there are times that A or B blocks are 2-3 lessons apart. It’s an organizational nightmare with multiple preps, but I can’t have kids miss twice the days.

Yep. So the PP who said it’s like missing 22 days is delusional.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:ES parent here. Our teachers most definitely did not follow the rules. My child had a new math lesson with new content today. Plus new homework supporting that content.

Good. After a year of learning loss, creating 15 more days on learning loss and justifying it in a public school based on religion is ridiculous. The sooner someone challenges this 100% illegal setup, the better.

It’s actually only 11 days, but ok.

And for kids on a block schedule in MS/HS, it’s 22 days. Which is not okay.

No it’s not. Math is not your strong suit. First of all, there are only a total only of 11 O days for the 21-22 school year. Not sure how you extrapolate to 22. A teacher on here explained it a while ago too. It’s 5 days on A days, and 6 days on B days. This is for the whole year. So it balances out.

They can be catch up days. Give the kids a break.

Do you have little kids?

Middle and high school are on the block schedule.

They only have 4 classes per day.

The MS and HS schedules alternate between A days and B days.

A and B days cover the same material every 2 days.

So if AB chemistry has a zero day on the Monday A day, then AP chemistry that meets on B days cannot move forward on the material.

11 days becomes 22 days of no learning for HS and MS.

Yes, I was right. You really aren’t getting it. Teachers are not going to hold the other class back on B day just because A day was an O day. They will be off by a few lessons. Big deal.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:ES parent here. Our teachers most definitely did not follow the rules. My child had a new math lesson with new content today. Plus new homework supporting that content.

Good. After a year of learning loss, creating 15 more days on learning loss and justifying it in a public school based on religion is ridiculous. The sooner someone challenges this 100% illegal setup, the better.

It’s actually only 11 days, but ok.

And for kids on a block schedule in MS/HS, it’s 22 days. Which is not okay.

No it’s not. Math is not your strong suit. First of all, there are only a total only of 11 O days for the 21-22 school year. Not sure how you extrapolate to 22. A teacher on here explained it a while ago too. It’s 5 days on A days, and 6 days on B days. This is for the whole year. So it balances out.

They can be catch up days. Give the kids a break.

Do you have little kids?

Middle and high school are on the block schedule.

They only have 4 classes per day.

The MS and HS schedules alternate between A days and B days.

A and B days cover the same material every 2 days.

So if AB chemistry has a zero day on the Monday A day, then AP chemistry that meets on B days cannot move forward on the material.

11 days becomes 22 days of no learning for HS and MS.

I teach AP. I’m not keeping classes in sync this year. I mapped out the whole year, and there are times that A or B blocks are 2-3 lessons apart. It’s an organizational nightmare with multiple preps, but I can’t have kids miss twice the days.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
The schoolboard formed a committee that spent months, perhaps even the past year, to come up with exactly that recommendation. But then the school board completely ignored the committe's recommendation and came up with this crazy mess of zero days, most of which are not celebrated as a major holiday for any of the fcps families. The committee took input from faith and community leaders, as well as other things like demographics and attendance.

Sorry, but you people REALLY need to start paying attention to the school board meetings and agenda.

THIS

We could have had just four days off based on a year of thoughtful planning from an interfaith group of stakeholders that the SB tasked with calendar planning. Instead, the Open Fairfax people were like "No, put our kids in school all the days!" and the SB slapped together this O day disaster within a month or so.

Also, side note: the O is for Religious Observance days (O for Observance). It's not a zero. They're not "zero days."

Except that’s not what happened. FCPS did not consult their lawyer, and when they did just before adopting the calendar, heir legal counsel told them the 4 days off was illegal, because there was no showing of secular need. And the lawyer was right. Of course, FCPS being FCPS, they then pushed through something even less legal with no notice to the community.

FCPS is a public school. Establishment clause and Lemon Test say we should not get religious holidays off (or hold school and not teach) without a secular need. There is a secular need for Christmas— too many a sense to run school. They discovered there was no secular need for the 4 holidays because there was a bump in absences, looking at historical data.

I have my issues with Open FCPS. But, this isn’t on Open FCPS. It’s on the SB for not bringing in their lawyer much earlier in the process.

Except it is. Here is an article citing the need to adjust the calendar for pandemic loss: https://wtop.com/fairfax-county/2021/02/fairfax-co-school-board-considers-new-calendar-to-address-learning-loss-from-pandemic/

And you can see from the March 18, 2021 SB minutes when they were supposed to vote one calendars A, B, or the slapped together C after community participation that the SB suddenly has a long list of totally unrelated concerns. Open FCPS MO is to throw out everything they can think of and hope something sticks. SB members used the pandemic loss Open FCPS argument to delay the calendar vote and then found a different argument to justify changing the calendar options.

This is all despite the fact that absenteeism data doesn't account for kids and teachers who don't feel they can miss on their holidays. Those families lost out on the faith equity the SB created a task force to address in the first place and a second time through these ridiculous O days, which do not address the ongoing problem of teachers scheduling things they're not supposed to (which was a rule, though less stringent) before.

Except nothing that you linked or referenced backs up your claim

From the WTOP article: "Calendar C does away with the new days off, in favor of more instructional days to help students make up for pandemic-related learning loss."

And the SB minutes I cited do, in fact, include a long list of unrelated "reasons" not to move forward with the calendars that addressed religious equity, while ignoring the original need for equity that led to the creation of the task force and calendars A and B in the first place. The SB, bungling reopening already and facing constant Open FCPS pressure plus antagonism from anti-religious families, caved with a plan that pleased no one.

What part of that do you think doesn't support my point?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:ES parent here. Our teachers most definitely did not follow the rules. My child had a new math lesson with new content today. Plus new homework supporting that content.

Good. After a year of learning loss, creating 15 more days on learning loss and justifying it in a public school based on religion is ridiculous. The sooner someone challenges this 100% illegal setup, the better.

It’s actually only 11 days, but ok.

And for kids on a block schedule in MS/HS, it’s 22 days. Which is not okay.

No it’s not. Math is not your strong suit. First of all, there are only a total only of 11 O days for the 21-22 school year. Not sure how you extrapolate to 22. A teacher on here explained it a while ago too. It’s 5 days on A days, and 6 days on B days. This is for the whole year. So it balances out.

They can be catch up days. Give the kids a break.

Do you have little kids?

Middle and high school are on the block schedule.

They only have 4 classes per day.

The MS and HS schedules alternate between A days and B days.

A and B days cover the same material every 2 days.

So if AB chemistry has a zero day on the Monday A day, then AP chemistry that meets on B days cannot move forward on the material.

11 days becomes 22 days of no learning for HS and MS.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
The schoolboard formed a committee that spent months, perhaps even the past year, to come up with exactly that recommendation. But then the school board completely ignored the committe's recommendation and came up with this crazy mess of zero days, most of which are not celebrated as a major holiday for any of the fcps families. The committee took input from faith and community leaders, as well as other things like demographics and attendance.

Sorry, but you people REALLY need to start paying attention to the school board meetings and agenda.

THIS

We could have had just four days off based on a year of thoughtful planning from an interfaith group of stakeholders that the SB tasked with calendar planning. Instead, the Open Fairfax people were like "No, put our kids in school all the days!" and the SB slapped together this O day disaster within a month or so.

Also, side note: the O is for Religious Observance days (O for Observance). It's not a zero. They're not "zero days."

Except that’s not what happened. FCPS did not consult their lawyer, and when they did just before adopting the calendar, heir legal counsel told them the 4 days off was illegal, because there was no showing of secular need. And the lawyer was right. Of course, FCPS being FCPS, they then pushed through something even less legal with no notice to the community.

FCPS is a public school. Establishment clause and Lemon Test say we should not get religious holidays off (or hold school and not teach) without a secular need. There is a secular need for Christmas— too many a sense to run school. They discovered there was no secular need for the 4 holidays because there was a bump in absences, looking at historical data.

I have my issues with Open FCPS. But, this isn’t on Open FCPS. It’s on the SB for not bringing in their lawyer much earlier in the process.

Except it is. Here is an article citing the need to adjust the calendar for pandemic loss: https://wtop.com/fairfax-county/2021/02/fairfax-co-school-board-considers-new-calendar-to-address-learning-loss-from-pandemic/

And you can see from the March 18, 2021 SB minutes when they were supposed to vote one calendars A, B, or the slapped together C after community participation that the SB suddenly has a long list of totally unrelated concerns. Open FCPS MO is to throw out everything they can think of and hope something sticks. SB members used the pandemic loss Open FCPS argument to delay the calendar vote and then found a different argument to justify changing the calendar options.

This is all despite the fact that absenteeism data doesn't account for kids and teachers who don't feel they can miss on their holidays. Those families lost out on the faith equity the SB created a task force to address in the first place and a second time through these ridiculous O days, which do not address the ongoing problem of teachers scheduling things they're not supposed to (which was a rule, though less stringent) before.

Except nothing that you linked or referenced backs up your claim