Anonymous wrote:I did two different MyMCPS trainings today and in both, the instructors specifically referenced using Zoom in the fall. In one training, the instructor showed us how use MyMCPS to make and post a video so that we could “introduce ourselves to our classes”.

Anonymous wrote:I think rather than trying to try to find a way to make face to face person learning safer, we should concentrate on making distance learning effective.

Much of the argument for traditional at-school learning is that children are not susceptible to the virus. However we're still learning about the virus. We now know that some children develop Multisystem Inflamatory Syndrome, that even asymptomatic cases can have lung damage, and that COVID may need to be re-classified as "airborn". Sending kids back to school at this point is making them human test subjects in a very dangerous experiment.

Distance Learning has been done for years. I remember stories of children in remote areas like the Alaska wilderness or Australia's Outback having distance learning long before cell phones/tablets, 5G, and Zoom. I know that more recently online curriculums have been used by homeschoolers. Rather than spending the summer conducting surveys and trying to decide what to do, have somebody study the available options and pick one that works.

I realize there are other, less academic benefits to children having school. We can implement new programs/systems as needes to compensate for these areas, as we did last Spring offering food distribution/meals through the school. Remember, in a typical year, students don't have school during the summer, Spring Break, and Winter Break.

There are probably special needs students whose needs cannot be met remotely. For this much smaller population, I would think it more feasible to provide for their needs in school, with much less risk than if the entire system was in attendance.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think rather than trying to try to find a way to make face to face person learning safer, we should concentrate on making distance learning effective.

Much of the argument for traditional at-school learning is that children are not susceptible to the virus. However we're still learning about the virus. We now know that some children develop Multisystem Inflamatory Syndrome, that even asymptomatic cases can have lung damage, and that COVID may need to be re-classified as "airborn". Sending kids back to school at this point is making them human test subjects in a very dangerous experiment.

Distance Learning has been done for years. I remember stories of children in remote areas like the Alaska wilderness or Australia's Outback having distance learning long before cell phones/tablets, 5G, and Zoom. I know that more recently online curriculums have been used by homeschoolers. Rather than spending the summer conducting surveys and trying to decide what to do, have somebody study the available options and pick one that works.

I realize there are other, less academic benefits to children having school. We can implement new programs/systems as needes to compensate for these areas, as we did last Spring offering food distribution/meals through the school. Remember, in a typical year, students don't have school during the summer, Spring Break, and Winter Break.

There are probably special needs students whose needs cannot be met remotely. For this much smaller population, I would think it more feasible to provide for their needs in school, with much less risk than if the entire system was in attendance.

No, actually, much of the argument for having school is that not having school harms children.

Is it possible to do remote instruction? Yes, obviously. Is it appropriate to do full-time remote instruction for everyone, given the current trends in Montgomery County? Absolutely not.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:According to numerous studies the virus is getting much weaker in potency. So even if people get infected, the symptoms will be much milder than before.

? where did you hear that

Anonymous wrote:According to numerous studies the virus is getting much weaker in potency. So even if people get infected, the symptoms will be much milder than before.

Anonymous wrote:According to numerous studies the virus is getting much weaker in potency. So even if people get infected, the symptoms will be much milder than before.

Anonymous wrote:I think rather than trying to try to find a way to make face to face person learning safer, we should concentrate on making distance learning effective.

Much of the argument for traditional at-school learning is that children are not susceptible to the virus. However we're still learning about the virus. We now know that some children develop Multisystem Inflamatory Syndrome, that even asymptomatic cases can have lung damage, and that COVID may need to be re-classified as "airborn". Sending kids back to school at this point is making them human test subjects in a very dangerous experiment.

Distance Learning has been done for years. I remember stories of children in remote areas like the Alaska wilderness or Australia's Outback having distance learning long before cell phones/tablets, 5G, and Zoom. I know that more recently online curriculums have been used by homeschoolers. Rather than spending the summer conducting surveys and trying to decide what to do, have somebody study the available options and pick one that works.

I realize there are other, less academic benefits to children having school. We can implement new programs/systems as needes to compensate for these areas, as we did last Spring offering food distribution/meals through the school. Remember, in a typical year, students don't have school during the summer, Spring Break, and Winter Break.

There are probably special needs students whose needs cannot be met remotely. For this much smaller population, I would think it more feasible to provide for their needs in school, with much less risk than if the entire system was in attendance.

Anonymous wrote:I think rather than trying to try to find a way to make face to face person learning safer, we should concentrate on making distance learning effective.

Much of the argument for traditional at-school learning is that children are not susceptible to the virus. However we're still learning about the virus. We now know that some children develop Multisystem Inflamatory Syndrome, that even asymptomatic cases can have lung damage, and that COVID may need to be re-classified as "airborn". Sending kids back to school at this point is making them human test subjects in a very dangerous experiment.

Distance Learning has been done for years. I remember stories of children in remote areas like the Alaska wilderness or Australia's Outback having distance learning long before cell phones/tablets, 5G, and Zoom. I know that more recently online curriculums have been used by homeschoolers. Rather than spending the summer conducting surveys and trying to decide what to do, have somebody study the available options and pick one that works.

I realize there are other, less academic benefits to children having school. We can implement new programs/systems as needes to compensate for these areas, as we did last Spring offering food distribution/meals through the school. Remember, in a typical year, students don't have school during the summer, Spring Break, and Winter Break.

There are probably special needs students whose needs cannot be met remotely. For this much smaller population, I would think it more feasible to provide for their needs in school, with much less risk than if the entire system was in attendance.

Anonymous wrote:According to numerous studies the virus is getting much weaker in potency. So even if people get infected, the symptoms will be much milder than before.

Anonymous wrote:
They have had months to figure this out. No excuses. Other districts have laid out plans. If they use the “we are too big” excuse again, just split up the f’ing county already! So sick of that excuse.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
This. The Board of Education Meeting was embarrassing. I certainly hope they are doing more on this outside of these announced meeting times, because they made zero progress in that meeting. I can't believe these are the people making decisions for this huge district. They are entirely focused on the achievement gap and making sure everyone gets meals (yes, important, but so is education). There was very little about school in the Fall.

I think a lot of parents aren't following this closely, and just assume it'll be either full time or part-time in-person when August 31 rolls around. They're in for a big surprise.

You don't need to be following closely; you just need to think of the massive amount of planning and execution required for a successful hybrid/part-time in person approach, and the (in)capabilities of a system as large as MCPS to pull that off successfully in the time that it has. (I guess we could have some sort of Trumpian miracle and full-time in-person school in the fall, but that actually would be even harder to impossible if you also want some modicum of social-distancing and safety protocols.) There is such a yawning gap between what MCPS may want to do and what it can do, and there are things that it must do (e.g., feed kids who depend on schools for meals, and that problem will only get worse this fall). People get completely bent out of shape when this is pointed out, so I guess they will just need to be surprised.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
This. The Board of Education Meeting was embarrassing. I certainly hope they are doing more on this outside of these announced meeting times, because they made zero progress in that meeting. I can't believe these are the people making decisions for this huge district. They are entirely focused on the achievement gap and making sure everyone gets meals (yes, important, but so is education). There was very little about school in the Fall.

I think a lot of parents aren't following this closely, and just assume it'll be either full time or part-time in-person when August 31 rolls around. They're in for a big surprise.

You don't need to be following closely; you just need to think of the massive amount of planning and execution required for a successful hybrid/part-time in person approach, and the (in)capabilities of a system as large as MCPS to pull that off successfully in the time that it has. (I guess we could have some sort of Trumpian miracle and full-time in-person school in the fall, but that actually would be even harder to impossible if you also want some modicum of social-distancing and safety protocols.) There is such a yawning gap between what MCPS may want to do and what it can do, and there are things that it must do (e.g., feed kids who depend on schools for meals, and that problem will only get worse this fall). People get completely bent out of shape when this is pointed out, so I guess they will just need to be surprised.

And yet all the neighboring counties have managed to figure it out.