Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

MAP is the only test that is allowed to be taken virtually. All other standardized tests have to be taken in person. Many opted out of those because the home schools all test on different days and it was very disruptive to their academic schedule as they missed VA classes to take the test and they usually were forced to sit in an empty room all by themselves all day. I wish some of you would allow a conversation to occur instead of picking up on one tiny nuance to justify your hate of a program that benefits students. Many students LOVE being home and learning. It would help if you asked a few. Even though the VA numbers are shrinking (mainly because of limited classes at the moment and home schools refusing to keep up their end of the bargain) it's still as large as some stand-alone elementary and middle schools here in the county. Could you imagine if we were talking about your child's school or magnet program shutting down? You all would be up in arms here. Try to have some empathy folks. I know you have it in you.

MAP is also the test that the evaluators used to look at how MVA students were making progress compared to their peers attending in-person school.

"Students attending Virtual Academy in Grades 3, 4, and 5 were significantly less likely than their inperson peers to meet their projected growth in reading in Spring 2022.

Within student service groups, MVA students receiving FARMS were significantly less likely than their inperson peers to meet their projected growth in reading in Spring 2022, but EMLs did not differ between the two groups. Among Asian, Black or African American, White, and Hispanic/Latino students, MVA students were significantly less likely to meet projected reading growth compared with their inperson peers."

The other item that really stands out is chronic absences. Overall, absences in MS and HS were similar to in-person counterparts, but chronic absences among MVA kids were alarmingly high in the elementary grades in particular. Almost a quarter of MVA kids in 2nd - 5th grades were chronically absent. That's a shocking figure. If this were about mental or physical health, you'd expect the figures to be static across grades or even higher for MS and HS. The numbers being so high among the youngest kids suggests something else may be at play, either families enrolling in MVA to facilitate Disney trips in the off-season, or more nefarious motivations such as removing kids from the line of view of mandatory reporters.

Didn’t even read this. This forum is full of educational experts here. Yes! So with that logic let’s kick out all the chronically absent kids. At least I’d they aren’t going in person there is an option! And if you cared so much about mandated reporting where was the outcry with all the skipping last year? Did CPS get called with all the kids in person schools LOST the ability to locate? Where they called when students where doing illegal drugs in the bathroom and sexually assaulting students? You look ridiculous with your cherry picking about a program because virtual didn’t work for you. Go find a productive hobby.

We can't continue to fund a failing program based on vibes. If you refuse to engage with the data, I don't know what exle anyone can do, but MCPS has decided to evaluate three programs: MVA, IS, and LiM.

What I want from my school district is to look at expenditures, conduct evaluation of impact, and make evidence-based decisions on whether to move forward. Based on the existing data, both the IS calendar and MVA need reconsideration. Outcomes are worse, which is not the direction we want to see in any educational experiment.

As for the allegation of cherry-picking, you have admitted to not reading the evaluation nor do you want to engage in discussion about excerpts. I know it is scary to face whatever fears you have about in-person schools, but I don't think MCPS can in good conscience continue with a program that sees kids falling further behind their peers.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The resident virtual school lover must be losing her mind over the prospect of letting her kids leave her sight.

There's always homeschool!

Grow up and realize getting rid of VA just keeps MCPS back in the past while the rest of the world moves forward. Virtual options are available at districts all over the country.

This… it’s embarrassing that MoCo parents refuse to evolve because they are still angry about 2020.

+ 1000
MVA is one of very few things MCPS did right.

Really? I heard it wasn’t very good. Maybe that’s partly why enrollment has been dropping.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Folks really should click through the report on MVA because it doesn't look good, assuming one wants to take an evidence-based approach. At the very least, the VA needs to be revamped to address the issues detailed in the report.

The report is easy to read, and clearly laid out, even if it does seem it took MCPS quite a while to make it public. The biggest takeaway is that MVA is not working at the ES level in particular. Attendance is worse for MVA than in-person school, and testing outcomes are significantly worse.

At the MS and HS levels, chronic absenteeism is about the same as the in-school population, but that itself is alarming given the dismal state of attendance in general.

At best, the data would suggest that MVA is not an appropriate model for K-5.

https://ww2.montgomeryschoolsmd.org/departments/sharedaccountability/reports/2023/Virtual%20Academy%20FINAL.pdf

Some of t that data is not accurate as many families opted out if testing.

This doesn't make any sense, though. The report says that for MAP-M only about 11% of kids opted out of the test. So, of the 89% of MVA kids who did take the tests, there were statistically significant (in some cases very significant) differences for K-5 kids in particular.

So, unless the missing 11% is for some reason also the highest scoring 11%, the numbers still show that MVA isn't working for K-5, at least in terms of attendance and mastery of core academic subjects. There's no reason to believe that the 89% who did take the test is not statistically representative of the broader group and in fact much more reason to believe that the 11% who didn't test are more likely to be lower scorers than higher scorers.

Stop bringing up facts and data in response to the fever dream that the virtual academy is a worthwhile program

MAP is the only test that is allowed to be taken virtually. All other standardized tests have to be taken in person. Many opted out of those because the home schools all test on different days and it was very disruptive to their academic schedule as they missed VA classes to take the test and they usually were forced to sit in an empty room all by themselves all day. I wish some of you would allow a conversation to occur instead of picking up on one tiny nuance to justify your hate of a program that benefits students. Many students LOVE being home and learning. It would help if you asked a few. Even though the VA numbers are shrinking (mainly because of limited classes at the moment and home schools refusing to keep up their end of the bargain) it's still as large as some stand-alone elementary and middle schools here in the county. Could you imagine if we were talking about your child's school or magnet program shutting down? You all would be up in arms here. Try to have some empathy folks. I know you have it in you.

Naw. If MCPS decided to build a new experimental school a few years ago and I opted to roll the dice to attend, I wouldn’t be up in arms if attendance dropped 40% two years in a row and the system started asking whether it’s wise to keep the school open.

+1. Also, at the posters saying that the test scores are biased because high performing families opted out- you are shooting yourself in the foot. If your kids are doing so we’ll get them in there for the tests. Otherwise don’t complain about the data. MCPS can only use what it has in front of it.

You are right, we did shoot ourselves in the foot, but its a bunch of bad choices and if you are in the MVA for health reasons, its a bit concerning to send your child to a school, that you have no contact with, when no one is masking or taking basic precautions AND the school refuses to accommodate the concerns.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Folks really should click through the report on MVA because it doesn't look good, assuming one wants to take an evidence-based approach. At the very least, the VA needs to be revamped to address the issues detailed in the report.

The report is easy to read, and clearly laid out, even if it does seem it took MCPS quite a while to make it public. The biggest takeaway is that MVA is not working at the ES level in particular. Attendance is worse for MVA than in-person school, and testing outcomes are significantly worse.

At the MS and HS levels, chronic absenteeism is about the same as the in-school population, but that itself is alarming given the dismal state of attendance in general.

At best, the data would suggest that MVA is not an appropriate model for K-5.

https://ww2.montgomeryschoolsmd.org/departments/sharedaccountability/reports/2023/Virtual%20Academy%20FINAL.pdf

Some of t that data is not accurate as many families opted out if testing.

This doesn't make any sense, though. The report says that for MAP-M only about 11% of kids opted out of the test. So, of the 89% of MVA kids who did take the tests, there were statistically significant (in some cases very significant) differences for K-5 kids in particular.

So, unless the missing 11% is for some reason also the highest scoring 11%, the numbers still show that MVA isn't working for K-5, at least in terms of attendance and mastery of core academic subjects. There's no reason to believe that the 89% who did take the test is not statistically representative of the broader group and in fact much more reason to believe that the 11% who didn't test are more likely to be lower scorers than higher scorers.

Stop bringing up facts and data in response to the fever dream that the virtual academy is a worthwhile program

MAP is the only test that is allowed to be taken virtually. All other standardized tests have to be taken in person. Many opted out of those because the home schools all test on different days and it was very disruptive to their academic schedule as they missed VA classes to take the test and they usually were forced to sit in an empty room all by themselves all day. I wish some of you would allow a conversation to occur instead of picking up on one tiny nuance to justify your hate of a program that benefits students. Many students LOVE being home and learning. It would help if you asked a few. Even though the VA numbers are shrinking (mainly because of limited classes at the moment and home schools refusing to keep up their end of the bargain) it's still as large as some stand-alone elementary and middle schools here in the county. Could you imagine if we were talking about your child's school or magnet program shutting down? You all would be up in arms here. Try to have some empathy folks. I know you have it in you.

Naw. If MCPS decided to build a new experimental school a few years ago and I opted to roll the dice to attend, I wouldn’t be up in arms if attendance dropped 40% two years in a row and the system started asking whether it’s wise to keep the school open.

+1. Also, at the posters saying that the test scores are biased because high performing families opted out- you are shooting yourself in the foot. If your kids are doing so we’ll get them in there for the tests. Otherwise don’t complain about the data. MCPS can only use what it has in front of it.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

MAP is the only test that is allowed to be taken virtually. All other standardized tests have to be taken in person. Many opted out of those because the home schools all test on different days and it was very disruptive to their academic schedule as they missed VA classes to take the test and they usually were forced to sit in an empty room all by themselves all day. I wish some of you would allow a conversation to occur instead of picking up on one tiny nuance to justify your hate of a program that benefits students. Many students LOVE being home and learning. It would help if you asked a few. Even though the VA numbers are shrinking (mainly because of limited classes at the moment and home schools refusing to keep up their end of the bargain) it's still as large as some stand-alone elementary and middle schools here in the county. Could you imagine if we were talking about your child's school or magnet program shutting down? You all would be up in arms here. Try to have some empathy folks. I know you have it in you.

MAP is also the test that the evaluators used to look at how MVA students were making progress compared to their peers attending in-person school.

"Students attending Virtual Academy in Grades 3, 4, and 5 were significantly less likely than their inperson peers to meet their projected growth in reading in Spring 2022.

Within student service groups, MVA students receiving FARMS were significantly less likely than their inperson peers to meet their projected growth in reading in Spring 2022, but EMLs did not differ between the two groups. Among Asian, Black or African American, White, and Hispanic/Latino students, MVA students were significantly less likely to meet projected reading growth compared with their inperson peers."

The other item that really stands out is chronic absences. Overall, absences in MS and HS were similar to in-person counterparts, but chronic absences among MVA kids were alarmingly high in the elementary grades in particular. Almost a quarter of MVA kids in 2nd - 5th grades were chronically absent. That's a shocking figure. If this were about mental or physical health, you'd expect the figures to be static across grades or even higher for MS and HS. The numbers being so high among the youngest kids suggests something else may be at play, either families enrolling in MVA to facilitate Disney trips in the off-season, or more nefarious motivations such as removing kids from the line of view of mandatory reporters.

Didn’t even read this. This forum is full of educational experts here. Yes! So with that logic let’s kick out all the chronically absent kids. At least I’d they aren’t going in person there is an option! And if you cared so much about mandated reporting where was the outcry with all the skipping last year? Did CPS get called with all the kids in person schools LOST the ability to locate? Where they called when students where doing illegal drugs in the bathroom and sexually assaulting students? You look ridiculous with your cherry picking about a program because virtual didn’t work for you. Go find a productive hobby.

We can't continue to fund a failing program based on vibes. If you refuse to engage with the data, I don't know what exle anyone can do, but MCPS has decided to evaluate three programs: MVA, IS, and LiM.

What I want from my school district is to look at expenditures, conduct evaluation of impact, and make evidence-based decisions on whether to move forward. Based on the existing data, both the IS calendar and MVA need reconsideration. Outcomes are worse, which is not the direction we want to see in any educational experiment.

As for the allegation of cherry-picking, you have admitted to not reading the evaluation nor do you want to engage in discussion about excerpts. I know it is scary to face whatever fears you have about in-person schools, but I don't think MCPS can in good conscience continue with a program that sees kids falling further behind their peers.

100%!!! People need to be ok with the MVA being scrutinized and re-evaluated because it SHOULD BE, just like everything else in the system.

LOL Literally nothing in MCPS is scrutinized. MCPS spends millions without ever even telling the Board of Education about the spending. That's legal in Maryland.

This hearing is just an election year prank for the incumbents to look busy.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The resident virtual school lover must be losing her mind over the prospect of letting her kids leave her sight.

There's always homeschool!

Grow up and realize getting rid of VA just keeps MCPS back in the past while the rest of the world moves forward. Virtual options are available at districts all over the country.

This… it’s embarrassing that MoCo parents refuse to evolve because they are still angry about 2020.

+ 1000
MVA is one of very few things MCPS did right.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

MAP is the only test that is allowed to be taken virtually. All other standardized tests have to be taken in person. Many opted out of those because the home schools all test on different days and it was very disruptive to their academic schedule as they missed VA classes to take the test and they usually were forced to sit in an empty room all by themselves all day. I wish some of you would allow a conversation to occur instead of picking up on one tiny nuance to justify your hate of a program that benefits students. Many students LOVE being home and learning. It would help if you asked a few. Even though the VA numbers are shrinking (mainly because of limited classes at the moment and home schools refusing to keep up their end of the bargain) it's still as large as some stand-alone elementary and middle schools here in the county. Could you imagine if we were talking about your child's school or magnet program shutting down? You all would be up in arms here. Try to have some empathy folks. I know you have it in you.

MAP is also the test that the evaluators used to look at how MVA students were making progress compared to their peers attending in-person school.

"Students attending Virtual Academy in Grades 3, 4, and 5 were significantly less likely than their inperson peers to meet their projected growth in reading in Spring 2022.

Within student service groups, MVA students receiving FARMS were significantly less likely than their inperson peers to meet their projected growth in reading in Spring 2022, but EMLs did not differ between the two groups. Among Asian, Black or African American, White, and Hispanic/Latino students, MVA students were significantly less likely to meet projected reading growth compared with their inperson peers."

The other item that really stands out is chronic absences. Overall, absences in MS and HS were similar to in-person counterparts, but chronic absences among MVA kids were alarmingly high in the elementary grades in particular. Almost a quarter of MVA kids in 2nd - 5th grades were chronically absent. That's a shocking figure. If this were about mental or physical health, you'd expect the figures to be static across grades or even higher for MS and HS. The numbers being so high among the youngest kids suggests something else may be at play, either families enrolling in MVA to facilitate Disney trips in the off-season, or more nefarious motivations such as removing kids from the line of view of mandatory reporters.

Didn’t even read this. This forum is full of educational experts here. Yes! So with that logic let’s kick out all the chronically absent kids. At least I’d they aren’t going in person there is an option! And if you cared so much about mandated reporting where was the outcry with all the skipping last year? Did CPS get called with all the kids in person schools LOST the ability to locate? Where they called when students where doing illegal drugs in the bathroom and sexually assaulting students? You look ridiculous with your cherry picking about a program because virtual didn’t work for you. Go find a productive hobby.

We can't continue to fund a failing program based on vibes. If you refuse to engage with the data, I don't know what exle anyone can do, but MCPS has decided to evaluate three programs: MVA, IS, and LiM.

What I want from my school district is to look at expenditures, conduct evaluation of impact, and make evidence-based decisions on whether to move forward. Based on the existing data, both the IS calendar and MVA need reconsideration. Outcomes are worse, which is not the direction we want to see in any educational experiment.

As for the allegation of cherry-picking, you have admitted to not reading the evaluation nor do you want to engage in discussion about excerpts. I know it is scary to face whatever fears you have about in-person schools, but I don't think MCPS can in good conscience continue with a program that sees kids falling further behind their peers.

100%!!! People need to be ok with the MVA being scrutinized and re-evaluated because it SHOULD BE, just like everything else in the system.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Folks really should click through the report on MVA because it doesn't look good, assuming one wants to take an evidence-based approach. At the very least, the VA needs to be revamped to address the issues detailed in the report.

The report is easy to read, and clearly laid out, even if it does seem it took MCPS quite a while to make it public. The biggest takeaway is that MVA is not working at the ES level in particular. Attendance is worse for MVA than in-person school, and testing outcomes are significantly worse.

At the MS and HS levels, chronic absenteeism is about the same as the in-school population, but that itself is alarming given the dismal state of attendance in general.

At best, the data would suggest that MVA is not an appropriate model for K-5.

https://ww2.montgomeryschoolsmd.org/departments/sharedaccountability/reports/2023/Virtual%20Academy%20FINAL.pdf

Some of t that data is not accurate as many families opted out if testing.

This doesn't make any sense, though. The report says that for MAP-M only about 11% of kids opted out of the test. So, of the 89% of MVA kids who did take the tests, there were statistically significant (in some cases very significant) differences for K-5 kids in particular.

So, unless the missing 11% is for some reason also the highest scoring 11%, the numbers still show that MVA isn't working for K-5, at least in terms of attendance and mastery of core academic subjects. There's no reason to believe that the 89% who did take the test is not statistically representative of the broader group and in fact much more reason to believe that the 11% who didn't test are more likely to be lower scorers than higher scorers.

Stop bringing up facts and data in response to the fever dream that the virtual academy is a worthwhile program

MAP is the only test that is allowed to be taken virtually. All other standardized tests have to be taken in person. Many opted out of those because the home schools all test on different days and it was very disruptive to their academic schedule as they missed VA classes to take the test and they usually were forced to sit in an empty room all by themselves all day. I wish some of you would allow a conversation to occur instead of picking up on one tiny nuance to justify your hate of a program that benefits students. Many students LOVE being home and learning. It would help if you asked a few. Even though the VA numbers are shrinking (mainly because of limited classes at the moment and home schools refusing to keep up their end of the bargain) it's still as large as some stand-alone elementary and middle schools here in the county. Could you imagine if we were talking about your child's school or magnet program shutting down? You all would be up in arms here. Try to have some empathy folks. I know you have it in you.

Naw. If MCPS decided to build a new experimental school a few years ago and I opted to roll the dice to attend, I wouldn’t be up in arms if attendance dropped 40% two years in a row and the system started asking whether it’s wise to keep the school open.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The resident virtual school lover must be losing her mind over the prospect of letting her kids leave her sight.

There's always homeschool!

Grow up and realize getting rid of VA just keeps MCPS back in the past while the rest of the world moves forward. Virtual options are available at districts all over the country.

This… it’s embarrassing that MoCo parents refuse to evolve because they are still angry about 2020.

+ 1000
MVA is one of very few things MCPS did right.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

MAP is the only test that is allowed to be taken virtually. All other standardized tests have to be taken in person. Many opted out of those because the home schools all test on different days and it was very disruptive to their academic schedule as they missed VA classes to take the test and they usually were forced to sit in an empty room all by themselves all day. I wish some of you would allow a conversation to occur instead of picking up on one tiny nuance to justify your hate of a program that benefits students. Many students LOVE being home and learning. It would help if you asked a few. Even though the VA numbers are shrinking (mainly because of limited classes at the moment and home schools refusing to keep up their end of the bargain) it's still as large as some stand-alone elementary and middle schools here in the county. Could you imagine if we were talking about your child's school or magnet program shutting down? You all would be up in arms here. Try to have some empathy folks. I know you have it in you.

MAP is also the test that the evaluators used to look at how MVA students were making progress compared to their peers attending in-person school.

"Students attending Virtual Academy in Grades 3, 4, and 5 were significantly less likely than their inperson peers to meet their projected growth in reading in Spring 2022.

Within student service groups, MVA students receiving FARMS were significantly less likely than their inperson peers to meet their projected growth in reading in Spring 2022, but EMLs did not differ between the two groups. Among Asian, Black or African American, White, and Hispanic/Latino students, MVA students were significantly less likely to meet projected reading growth compared with their inperson peers."

The other item that really stands out is chronic absences. Overall, absences in MS and HS were similar to in-person counterparts, but chronic absences among MVA kids were alarmingly high in the elementary grades in particular. Almost a quarter of MVA kids in 2nd - 5th grades were chronically absent. That's a shocking figure. If this were about mental or physical health, you'd expect the figures to be static across grades or even higher for MS and HS. The numbers being so high among the youngest kids suggests something else may be at play, either families enrolling in MVA to facilitate Disney trips in the off-season, or more nefarious motivations such as removing kids from the line of view of mandatory reporters.

Didn’t even read this. This forum is full of educational experts here. Yes! So with that logic let’s kick out all the chronically absent kids. At least I’d they aren’t going in person there is an option! And if you cared so much about mandated reporting where was the outcry with all the skipping last year? Did CPS get called with all the kids in person schools LOST the ability to locate? Where they called when students where doing illegal drugs in the bathroom and sexually assaulting students? You look ridiculous with your cherry picking about a program because virtual didn’t work for you. Go find a productive hobby.

We can't continue to fund a failing program based on vibes. If you refuse to engage with the data, I don't know what exle anyone can do, but MCPS has decided to evaluate three programs: MVA, IS, and LiM.

What I want from my school district is to look at expenditures, conduct evaluation of impact, and make evidence-based decisions on whether to move forward. Based on the existing data, both the IS calendar and MVA need reconsideration. Outcomes are worse, which is not the direction we want to see in any educational experiment.

As for the allegation of cherry-picking, you have admitted to not reading the evaluation nor do you want to engage in discussion about excerpts. I know it is scary to face whatever fears you have about in-person schools, but I don't think MCPS can in good conscience continue with a program that sees kids falling further behind their peers.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

MAP is the only test that is allowed to be taken virtually. All other standardized tests have to be taken in person. Many opted out of those because the home schools all test on different days and it was very disruptive to their academic schedule as they missed VA classes to take the test and they usually were forced to sit in an empty room all by themselves all day. I wish some of you would allow a conversation to occur instead of picking up on one tiny nuance to justify your hate of a program that benefits students. Many students LOVE being home and learning. It would help if you asked a few. Even though the VA numbers are shrinking (mainly because of limited classes at the moment and home schools refusing to keep up their end of the bargain) it's still as large as some stand-alone elementary and middle schools here in the county. Could you imagine if we were talking about your child's school or magnet program shutting down? You all would be up in arms here. Try to have some empathy folks. I know you have it in you.

MAP is also the test that the evaluators used to look at how MVA students were making progress compared to their peers attending in-person school.

"Students attending Virtual Academy in Grades 3, 4, and 5 were significantly less likely than their inperson peers to meet their projected growth in reading in Spring 2022.

Within student service groups, MVA students receiving FARMS were significantly less likely than their inperson peers to meet their projected growth in reading in Spring 2022, but EMLs did not differ between the two groups. Among Asian, Black or African American, White, and Hispanic/Latino students, MVA students were significantly less likely to meet projected reading growth compared with their inperson peers."

The other item that really stands out is chronic absences. Overall, absences in MS and HS were similar to in-person counterparts, but chronic absences among MVA kids were alarmingly high in the elementary grades in particular. Almost a quarter of MVA kids in 2nd - 5th grades were chronically absent. That's a shocking figure. If this were about mental or physical health, you'd expect the figures to be static across grades or even higher for MS and HS. The numbers being so high among the youngest kids suggests something else may be at play, either families enrolling in MVA to facilitate Disney trips in the off-season, or more nefarious motivations such as removing kids from the line of view of mandatory reporters.

Didn’t even read this. This forum is full of educational experts here. Yes! So with that logic let’s kick out all the chronically absent kids. At least I’d they aren’t going in person there is an option! And if you cared so much about mandated reporting where was the outcry with all the skipping last year? Did CPS get called with all the kids in person schools LOST the ability to locate? Where they called when students where doing illegal drugs in the bathroom and sexually assaulting students? You look ridiculous with your cherry picking about a program because virtual didn’t work for you. Go find a productive hobby.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The resident virtual school lover must be losing her mind over the prospect of letting her kids leave her sight.

There's always homeschool!

Grow up and realize getting rid of VA just keeps MCPS back in the past while the rest of the world moves forward. Virtual options are available at districts all over the country.

This… it’s embarrassing that MoCo parents refuse to evolve because they are still angry about 2020.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It would be great if they could use VA to supplement options at home school, like offer a broader range of languages and let kids at regular HS take a virtual class. There are ways it could be good and have more use, but probably not the way it’s being done. For younger kids, they should probably just improve the existing program for chronically ill children.

This was the plan originally but not funded. The younger kids program changed last year to live teaching from this surveys asynchronous. So, why aren’t they showing last years data with the school changes?

The report says that only social studies and science were asynchronous, but the other subjects (including English and math) were synchronous and delivered much the same as in-person instruction. It's not GREAT that those subjects were asynchronous, but it also does not account for the lagging test scores.

As for why data from this year or last year isn't reflected, these sorts of evaluations don't take place every year. In terms of methodology, it's common to check in on initiatives every 3 years or so, allowing evaluator time to be spread across pilot projects.

The live teaching was not full teaching in those subjects like it is now so to use the first year as your data point when the school was not adequately given enough teachers is an unfair representation of the school. And, they don’t break down medically fragile kids, special need kids and many other factors. The board or any admin have come to meetings and talked to families on their experiences or needs and wants and is just throwing the school under the bus because they failed to manage the budget due to their poor decisions.

Sone of us will leave mcps if they get rid of the program, but maybe that’s what they want.

It sounds like a different school would better fit your objectives. Maybe you can get the Turpins to teach virtually from their prison cells.

I feel sorry for your kids that they have a parent with this nasty attitude and don't care that maybe it is working for some students. Why do you even care? What is your agenda? It has zero impacts on you.

Of course it does. Budgets are zero-sum. Each dollar spent on VA is a dollar not going to more effective programs and resources.

The cost is minimal compared to many other wasteful things mcps does. It has. Sri impact on you.

It's an ongoing program (for now) that costs millions of dollars a year to operate. Everyone here seems to acknowledge that it can't go on in its current form, so some people are proposing that we expand it in ways that will make even more expensive. Of course there's a budget impact.

Yes, it's almost as expensive as what they spent on bocce equipment for PE.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It would be great if they could use VA to supplement options at home school, like offer a broader range of languages and let kids at regular HS take a virtual class. There are ways it could be good and have more use, but probably not the way it’s being done. For younger kids, they should probably just improve the existing program for chronically ill children.

This was the plan originally but not funded. The younger kids program changed last year to live teaching from this surveys asynchronous. So, why aren’t they showing last years data with the school changes?

The report says that only social studies and science were asynchronous, but the other subjects (including English and math) were synchronous and delivered much the same as in-person instruction. It's not GREAT that those subjects were asynchronous, but it also does not account for the lagging test scores.

As for why data from this year or last year isn't reflected, these sorts of evaluations don't take place every year. In terms of methodology, it's common to check in on initiatives every 3 years or so, allowing evaluator time to be spread across pilot projects.

The live teaching was not full teaching in those subjects like it is now so to use the first year as your data point when the school was not adequately given enough teachers is an unfair representation of the school. And, they don’t break down medically fragile kids, special need kids and many other factors. The board or any admin have come to meetings and talked to families on their experiences or needs and wants and is just throwing the school under the bus because they failed to manage the budget due to their poor decisions.

Sone of us will leave mcps if they get rid of the program, but maybe that’s what they want.

It sounds like a different school would better fit your objectives. Maybe you can get the Turpins to teach virtually from their prison cells.

I feel sorry for your kids that they have a parent with this nasty attitude and don't care that maybe it is working for some students. Why do you even care? What is your agenda? It has zero impacts on you.

Of course it does. Budgets are zero-sum. Each dollar spent on VA is a dollar not going to more effective programs and resources.

The cost is minimal compared to many other wasteful things mcps does. It has. Sri impact on you.

It's an ongoing program (for now) that costs millions of dollars a year to operate. Everyone here seems to acknowledge that it can't go on in its current form, so some people are proposing that we expand it in ways that will make even more expensive. Of course there's a budget impact.

Yes, it's almost as expensive as what they spent on bocce equipment for PE.

Anonymous wrote:

MAP is the only test that is allowed to be taken virtually. All other standardized tests have to be taken in person. Many opted out of those because the home schools all test on different days and it was very disruptive to their academic schedule as they missed VA classes to take the test and they usually were forced to sit in an empty room all by themselves all day. I wish some of you would allow a conversation to occur instead of picking up on one tiny nuance to justify your hate of a program that benefits students. Many students LOVE being home and learning. It would help if you asked a few. Even though the VA numbers are shrinking (mainly because of limited classes at the moment and home schools refusing to keep up their end of the bargain) it's still as large as some stand-alone elementary and middle schools here in the county. Could you imagine if we were talking about your child's school or magnet program shutting down? You all would be up in arms here. Try to have some empathy folks. I know you have it in you.

MAP is also the test that the evaluators used to look at how MVA students were making progress compared to their peers attending in-person school.

"Students attending Virtual Academy in Grades 3, 4, and 5 were significantly less likely than their inperson peers to meet their projected growth in reading in Spring 2022.

Within student service groups, MVA students receiving FARMS were significantly less likely than their inperson peers to meet their projected growth in reading in Spring 2022, but EMLs did not differ between the two groups. Among Asian, Black or African American, White, and Hispanic/Latino students, MVA students were significantly less likely to meet projected reading growth compared with their inperson peers."

The other item that really stands out is chronic absences. Overall, absences in MS and HS were similar to in-person counterparts, but chronic absences among MVA kids were alarmingly high in the elementary grades in particular. Almost a quarter of MVA kids in 2nd - 5th grades were chronically absent. That's a shocking figure. If this were about mental or physical health, you'd expect the figures to be static across grades or even higher for MS and HS. The numbers being so high among the youngest kids suggests something else may be at play, either families enrolling in MVA to facilitate Disney trips in the off-season, or more nefarious motivations such as removing kids from the line of view of mandatory reporters.