Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:When are they going to make this a priority to get the plan submitted?

At the rate they move, I doubt they'll even have it approved by winter 2027. They have to do public consultations, and if one parent complains, they'll say they had parental opposition and won't do anything. Because that's their preference anyway.

Are you saying that no parents complain in the other counties, such as in Anne Arundel?

Of course they do. And I'm sure they have kids younger than grade 3 and with special needs in Anne Arundel, Baltimore and PG County, yet somehow the state of Maryland approved the virtual learning plans they submitted.

But these are all the excuses DCUM gives as to why MCPS can't have a virtual learning plan for snow emergencies, and MCPS does like to make a lot of excuses for its inaction.

The lack of 1:1 devices in all schools is not an excuse DCUM came up with. It's straight from the horse's mouth: https://mocoshow.com/2026/01/29/mcps-explains-why-snow-days-are-not-virtual-learning-days/

According to MCPS, virtual instruction is not an option during these closures for several key reasons tied to access, timing, and state requirements. First, the school system does not currently have one to one remote devices available for every student. Without universal access to devices, MCPS says moving to virtual learning would create inequities and prevent many students from participating fully in instruction.

You don't need a Chromebook for every kid-- you just need enough Chromebooks to cover the kids who don't have their own device they can use at home instead.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Some new material can be covered depending on length of school closing

At the risk of drawing the wrath of some people, it's really unrealistic to expect the introduction of new material during online learning in these events. Many students may be tasked with child care for younger siblings, be at risk of power outages, have to assist with snow removal/cleanup, etc. If you introduce new material it just forces teachers to potentially waste time having to teach this material twice when it can be done much more efficiently and effectively, one time in person. Maybe you can introduce the next chapter, but I would avoid having any discussion or graded assignments on that new material during these extended closure distance learning days.

What about for AP Physics C and Multivariable? How many of those kids won’t be able to log in? Do they really have to stick to review?

Anonymous wrote:MCPS is claiming they can't do a virtual plan because not every school is a 1:1 device school. I don't know if that's true, but that's what they're claiming.

Most MS and HS kids and grades 4 and 5 have Chromebooks. MCPS has a $3bn budget. If that's the real reason they could buy some more ipads for kids K-3. PGCPS did it, and they're a lot poorer than MCPS.

https://www.pgcps.org/globalassets/offices/information-technology/docs---information-technology/prolonged-state-of-emergency-virtual-plan.pdf
As a 1-to-1 district, every student in PGCPS has access to a digital mobile device (Chromebook
or iPad) for use at school. If needed, the student may be assigned a device to take home.
Every teacher has access to a Mac or PC for use at school or home. Using their device,
teachers and students may connect through virtual conferencing programs such as Zoom or
Google Meet. This allows PGCPS to provide synchronous virtual learning in real time as well as
asynchronous learning opportunities.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:When are they going to make this a priority to get the plan submitted?

At the rate they move, I doubt they'll even have it approved by winter 2027. They have to do public consultations, and if one parent complains, they'll say they had parental opposition and won't do anything. Because that's their preference anyway.

Are you saying that no parents complain in the other counties, such as in Anne Arundel?

Of course they do. And I'm sure they have kids younger than grade 3 and with special needs in Anne Arundel, Baltimore and PG County, yet somehow the state of Maryland approved the virtual learning plans they submitted.

But these are all the excuses DCUM gives as to why MCPS can't have a virtual learning plan for snow emergencies, and MCPS does like to make a lot of excuses for its inaction.

The lack of 1:1 devices in all schools is not an excuse DCUM came up with. It's straight from the horse's mouth: https://mocoshow.com/2026/01/29/mcps-explains-why-snow-days-are-not-virtual-learning-days/

According to MCPS, virtual instruction is not an option during these closures for several key reasons tied to access, timing, and state requirements. First, the school system does not currently have one to one remote devices available for every student. Without universal access to devices, MCPS says moving to virtual learning would create inequities and prevent many students from participating fully in instruction.

So better for 100K students to have no instruction? Is MCPS saying that the virtual learning for snow event plans that MSDE approved for Baltimore, Anne Arundel and PG County are all inequitable?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:When are they going to make this a priority to get the plan submitted?

The priority should be NOT doing one.

MCPS has been NOT doing a plan for virtual learning during snow emergencies for the last two years when it promised it would. Other school districts have.

Anonymous wrote:When are they going to make this a priority to get the plan submitted?

The priority should be NOT doing one.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:When are they going to make this a priority to get the plan submitted?

At the rate they move, I doubt they'll even have it approved by winter 2027. They have to do public consultations, and if one parent complains, they'll say they had parental opposition and won't do anything. Because that's their preference anyway.

Are you saying that no parents complain in the other counties, such as in Anne Arundel?

Of course they do. And I'm sure they have kids younger than grade 3 and with special needs in Anne Arundel, Baltimore and PG County, yet somehow the state of Maryland approved the virtual learning plans they submitted.

But these are all the excuses DCUM gives as to why MCPS can't have a virtual learning plan for snow emergencies, and MCPS does like to make a lot of excuses for its inaction.

The lack of 1:1 devices in all schools is not an excuse DCUM came up with. It's straight from the horse's mouth: https://mocoshow.com/2026/01/29/mcps-explains-why-snow-days-are-not-virtual-learning-days/

According to MCPS, virtual instruction is not an option during these closures for several key reasons tied to access, timing, and state requirements. First, the school system does not currently have one to one remote devices available for every student. Without universal access to devices, MCPS says moving to virtual learning would create inequities and prevent many students from participating fully in instruction.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They should just do it quickly. Here’s the McPS board doc from 2024 where MCPS said it was planning to do a virtual learning plan for severe weather days.
https://www.boarddocs.com/mabe/mcpsmd/Board.nsf/files/D5QU3H7A16AC/$file/FY2024-2025%20SY%20Virtual%20Education%20Plan%20240523%20PPT.pdf

Here’s the one PG county submitted. There are ones from Anne Arundel and Baltimore online too. I’m sure the MCPS central office can just do find/replace and insert MCPS into the document.
https://www.pgcps.org/globalassets/offices/information-technology/docs---information-technology/prolonged-state-of-emergency-virtual-plan.pdf

Find/replace. It would be funny if MCPS submitted one that had the name of another county in it.

Who/which office at Central Office reviews, edits, and creates the plan?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:When are they going to make this a priority to get the plan submitted?

At the rate they move, I doubt they'll even have it approved by winter 2027. They have to do public consultations, and if one parent complains, they'll say they had parental opposition and won't do anything. Because that's their preference anyway.

Are you saying that no parents complain in the other counties, such as in Anne Arundel?

Of course they do. And I'm sure they have kids younger than grade 3 and with special needs in Anne Arundel, Baltimore and PG County, yet somehow the state of Maryland approved the virtual learning plans they submitted.

But these are all the excuses DCUM gives as to why MCPS can't have a virtual learning plan for snow emergencies, and MCPS does like to make a lot of excuses for its inaction.

They seem to pull talking points and verbage out of this forum.

Anonymous wrote:They should just do it quickly. Here’s the McPS board doc from 2024 where MCPS said it was planning to do a virtual learning plan for severe weather days.
https://www.boarddocs.com/mabe/mcpsmd/Board.nsf/files/D5QU3H7A16AC/$file/FY2024-2025%20SY%20Virtual%20Education%20Plan%20240523%20PPT.pdf

Here’s the one PG county submitted. There are ones from Anne Arundel and Baltimore online too. I’m sure the MCPS central office can just do find/replace and insert MCPS into the document.
https://www.pgcps.org/globalassets/offices/information-technology/docs---information-technology/prolonged-state-of-emergency-virtual-plan.pdf

Find/replace. It would be funny if MCPS submitted one that had the name of another county in it.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:When are they going to make this a priority to get the plan submitted?

At the rate they move, I doubt they'll even have it approved by winter 2027. They have to do public consultations, and if one parent complains, they'll say they had parental opposition and won't do anything. Because that's their preference anyway.

Are you saying that no parents complain in the other counties, such as in Anne Arundel?

Of course they do. And I'm sure they have kids younger than grade 3 and with special needs in Anne Arundel, Baltimore and PG County, yet somehow the state of Maryland approved the virtual learning plans they submitted.

But these are all the excuses DCUM gives as to why MCPS can't have a virtual learning plan for snow emergencies, and MCPS does like to make a lot of excuses for its inaction.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:When are they going to make this a priority to get the plan submitted?

At the rate they move, I doubt they'll even have it approved by winter 2027. They have to do public consultations, and if one parent complains, they'll say they had parental opposition and won't do anything. Because that's their preference anyway.

Are you saying that no parents complain in the other counties, such as in Anne Arundel?

Anonymous wrote:When are they going to make this a priority to get the plan submitted?

At the rate they move, I doubt they'll even have it approved by winter 2027. They have to do public consultations, and if one parent complains, they'll say they had parental opposition and won't do anything. Because that's their preference anyway.

The request was set to be sent in 2024. Why wasnt the plan submitted to Maryland?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:MCPS is claiming they can't do a virtual plan because not every school is a 1:1 device school. I don't know if that's true, but that's what they're claiming.

So PG county and Baltimore and Anne Arundel can but MCPS can’t? Those counties are poorer than MoCo.

Montgomery is largest county. Does it have the most students?

NYC did virtual learning for part of last week. It has 10x the students of MCPS, and only 75% of NYC residents have broadband Internet compared to 95% of MoCo residents.

Thousands of schools around the country did virtual learning last week. Perhaps MCPS could use some of its $3bn budget and figure out how to function.