Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't think APS has accurate data on the % of medically vulnerable kids, so I don't think the numbers people are citing here are accurate. Maybe people are assuming SPED = medically vulnerable? My kids are medically at risk. When we signed up for VLP last Spring I remember a question about why we were choosing VLP. I could only choose one even though more than one reason applied to us. I don't remember which one I chose.

APS doesn't. If you look at Fairfax, they have a virtual enrollment of 0.2% of its student body in its medical-only virtual program. APS has a 2.7% virtual enrollment in its open virtual program.

Fairfax worded the requirement in a way doctors were concerned anything less than boy-in-a-bubble getting a note might be viewed as malpractice. If this was a good faith argument from a numerically literate person, it would have acknowledged a large number of factors making any conclusions and comparisons foolish.

If.

Fairfax did it absolutely correct. People who are afraid to put their kids in school are not following the science (the science has been 100% clear for a year now). Kids need to be in school and, as the data has shown, they are getting a proven inferior form of education online.

If they want to do online school, the state has 2 statewide online schools or they can homeschool their kids.

Parent of early ES VLP kids here. The science shows kids need to be in school. The science also shows that my kids are at risk of serious complications if they get COVID so we're in VLP until they get vaccinated. I agree my kids are getting an inferior education than they would be if they were in person. I wish there wasn't a pandemic and my kids could be in school. From what I heard anecdotally from friends and family doing virtual or hybrid in other districts around the country, my kids' inferior virtual education last year was still superior to the virtual education many other kids had. So THANK YOU APS!

The poster actually agreed APS should have provided a virtual program to your children with possible serious complications from COVID, assuming you could have a doctor certify that, along with all of the probable 0.2% of the student body that could show certified medical reasons. Most people's beef is with the 2.4% of the student body who is enrolled in the virtual program who doesn't have a certified medical reason to be there.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't think APS has accurate data on the % of medically vulnerable kids, so I don't think the numbers people are citing here are accurate. Maybe people are assuming SPED = medically vulnerable? My kids are medically at risk. When we signed up for VLP last Spring I remember a question about why we were choosing VLP. I could only choose one even though more than one reason applied to us. I don't remember which one I chose.

APS doesn't. If you look at Fairfax, they have a virtual enrollment of 0.2% of its student body in its medical-only virtual program. APS has a 2.7% virtual enrollment in its open virtual program.

Fairfax worded the requirement in a way doctors were concerned anything less than boy-in-a-bubble getting a note might be viewed as malpractice. If this was a good faith argument from a numerically literate person, it would have acknowledged a large number of factors making any conclusions and comparisons foolish.

If.

Fairfax did it absolutely correct. People who are afraid to put their kids in school are not following the science (the science has been 100% clear for a year now). Kids need to be in school and, as the data has shown, they are getting a proven inferior form of education online.

If they want to do online school, the state has 2 statewide online schools or they can homeschool their kids.

Parent of early ES VLP kids here. The science shows kids need to be in school. The science also shows that my kids are at risk of serious complications if they get COVID so we're in VLP until they get vaccinated. I agree my kids are getting an inferior education than they would be if they were in person. I wish there wasn't a pandemic and my kids could be in school. From what I heard anecdotally from friends and family doing virtual or hybrid in other districts around the country, my kids' inferior virtual education last year was still superior to the virtual education many other kids had. So THANK YOU APS!

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't think APS has accurate data on the % of medically vulnerable kids, so I don't think the numbers people are citing here are accurate. Maybe people are assuming SPED = medically vulnerable? My kids are medically at risk. When we signed up for VLP last Spring I remember a question about why we were choosing VLP. I could only choose one even though more than one reason applied to us. I don't remember which one I chose.

APS doesn't. If you look at Fairfax, they have a virtual enrollment of 0.2% of its student body in its medical-only virtual program. APS has a 2.7% virtual enrollment in its open virtual program.

Fairfax worded the requirement in a way doctors were concerned anything less than boy-in-a-bubble getting a note might be viewed as malpractice. If this was a good faith argument from a numerically literate person, it would have acknowledged a large number of factors making any conclusions and comparisons foolish.

If.

Fairfax did it absolutely correct. People who are afraid to put their kids in school are not following the science (the science has been 100% clear for a year now). Kids need to be in school and, as the data has shown, they are getting a proven inferior form of education online.

If they want to do online school, the state has 2 statewide online schools or they can homeschool their kids.

Parent of early ES VLP kids here. The science shows kids need to be in school. The science also shows that my kids are at risk of serious complications if they get COVID so we're in VLP until they get vaccinated. I agree my kids are getting an inferior education than they would be if they were in person. I wish there wasn't a pandemic and my kids could be in school. From what I heard anecdotally from friends and family doing virtual or hybrid in other districts around the country, my kids' inferior virtual education last year was still superior to the virtual education many other kids had. So THANK YOU APS!

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't think APS has accurate data on the % of medically vulnerable kids, so I don't think the numbers people are citing here are accurate. Maybe people are assuming SPED = medically vulnerable? My kids are medically at risk. When we signed up for VLP last Spring I remember a question about why we were choosing VLP. I could only choose one even though more than one reason applied to us. I don't remember which one I chose.

APS doesn't. If you look at Fairfax, they have a virtual enrollment of 0.2% of its student body in its medical-only virtual program. APS has a 2.7% virtual enrollment in its open virtual program.

Fairfax worded the requirement in a way doctors were concerned anything less than boy-in-a-bubble getting a note might be viewed as malpractice. If this was a good faith argument from a numerically literate person, it would have acknowledged a large number of factors making any conclusions and comparisons foolish.

If.

Fairfax did it absolutely correct. People who are afraid to put their kids in school are not following the science (the science has been 100% clear for a year now). Kids need to be in school and, as the data has shown, they are getting a proven inferior form of education online.

If they want to do online school, the state has 2 statewide online schools or they can homeschool their kids.

Parent of early ES VLP kids here. The science shows kids need to be in school. The science also shows that my kids are at risk of serious complications if they get COVID so we're in VLP until they get vaccinated. I agree my kids are getting an inferior education than they would be if they were in person. I wish there wasn't a pandemic and my kids could be in school. From what I heard anecdotally from friends and family doing virtual or hybrid in other districts around the country, my kids' inferior virtual education last year was still superior to the virtual education many other kids had. So THANK YOU APS!

Anonymous wrote:The saddest part of this thread is all the people who moved to Arlington for its schools and now are spending their time trying to recreate the Texas, Florida, and Kansases they escaped.

“After decades of not watering plants, they all died. Now I’m angry that people in my new town are wasting money watering plants and I want to put a stop to it!”

It’s a scientific mystery.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't think APS has accurate data on the % of medically vulnerable kids, so I don't think the numbers people are citing here are accurate. Maybe people are assuming SPED = medically vulnerable? My kids are medically at risk. When we signed up for VLP last Spring I remember a question about why we were choosing VLP. I could only choose one even though more than one reason applied to us. I don't remember which one I chose.

APS doesn't. If you look at Fairfax, they have a virtual enrollment of 0.2% of its student body in its medical-only virtual program. APS has a 2.7% virtual enrollment in its open virtual program.

Fairfax worded the requirement in a way doctors were concerned anything less than boy-in-a-bubble getting a note might be viewed as malpractice. If this was a good faith argument from a numerically literate person, it would have acknowledged a large number of factors making any conclusions and comparisons foolish.

If.

Fairfax did it absolutely correct. People who are afraid to put their kids in school are not following the science (the science has been 100% clear for a year now). Kids need to be in school and, as the data has shown, they are getting a proven inferior form of education online.

If they want to do online school, the state has 2 statewide online schools or they can homeschool their kids.

The best part of this “follow the science” chant is that not a single APE person has ever demonstrated they should have been trusted in elementary science class with that gentleman’s C they got. Remember the clown who posted a chart that started at 25,000 and went up and down in the range to 26,000, which looked like a huge drop because THE BASELINE WAS 25,000? LOL. And here we are with some gish-galloping over extreme immunodeficiency. If you knew your head from a hole in the ground, you’d know that above clinical immunodeficiency, there are some immune factors that typically are triple in healthy individuals. But, a doctor with their livelihood on the line isn’t going to take a chance, and isn’t going to be “held accountable,” so their behavioral / systematic outcome was foreordained. And you call that right. Honk, honk.

None of that actually matters because this is just an echo chamber for some ALEC funded anti-education zealots, harnessing some useful idiots and their easily led outrage. But, APE nature being what it is, rather than follow the money, you’ll all double down and insist you want what’s best for the kids. Which coincidentally required no research nor work by you.

Amazing.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't think APS has accurate data on the % of medically vulnerable kids, so I don't think the numbers people are citing here are accurate. Maybe people are assuming SPED = medically vulnerable? My kids are medically at risk. When we signed up for VLP last Spring I remember a question about why we were choosing VLP. I could only choose one even though more than one reason applied to us. I don't remember which one I chose.

APS doesn't. If you look at Fairfax, they have a virtual enrollment of 0.2% of its student body in its medical-only virtual program. APS has a 2.7% virtual enrollment in its open virtual program.

Fairfax worded the requirement in a way doctors were concerned anything less than boy-in-a-bubble getting a note might be viewed as malpractice. If this was a good faith argument from a numerically literate person, it would have acknowledged a large number of factors making any conclusions and comparisons foolish.

If.

Fairfax did it absolutely correct. People who are afraid to put their kids in school are not following the science (the science has been 100% clear for a year now). Kids need to be in school and, as the data has shown, they are getting a proven inferior form of education online.

If they want to do online school, the state has 2 statewide online schools or they can homeschool their kids.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't think APS has accurate data on the % of medically vulnerable kids, so I don't think the numbers people are citing here are accurate. Maybe people are assuming SPED = medically vulnerable? My kids are medically at risk. When we signed up for VLP last Spring I remember a question about why we were choosing VLP. I could only choose one even though more than one reason applied to us. I don't remember which one I chose.

APS doesn't. If you look at Fairfax, they have a virtual enrollment of 0.2% of its student body in its medical-only virtual program. APS has a 2.7% virtual enrollment in its open virtual program.

Fairfax worded the requirement in a way doctors were concerned anything less than boy-in-a-bubble getting a note might be viewed as malpractice. If this was a good faith argument from a numerically literate person, it would have acknowledged a large number of factors making any conclusions and comparisons foolish.

If.

Fairfax did it absolutely correct. People who are afraid to put their kids in school are not following the science (the science has been 100% clear for a year now). Kids need to be in school and, as the data has shown, they are getting a proven inferior form of education online.

If they want to do online school, the state has 2 statewide online schools or they can homeschool their kids.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't think APS has accurate data on the % of medically vulnerable kids, so I don't think the numbers people are citing here are accurate. Maybe people are assuming SPED = medically vulnerable? My kids are medically at risk. When we signed up for VLP last Spring I remember a question about why we were choosing VLP. I could only choose one even though more than one reason applied to us. I don't remember which one I chose.

APS doesn't. If you look at Fairfax, they have a virtual enrollment of 0.2% of its student body in its medical-only virtual program. APS has a 2.7% virtual enrollment in its open virtual program.

Fairfax worded the requirement in a way doctors were concerned anything less than boy-in-a-bubble getting a note might be viewed as malpractice. If this was a good faith argument from a numerically literate person, it would have acknowledged a large number of factors making any conclusions and comparisons foolish.

If.

Fairfax did it absolutely correct. People who are afraid to put their kids in school are not following the science (the science has been 100% clear for a year now). Kids need to be in school and, as the data has shown, they are getting a proven inferior form of education online.

If they want to do online school, the state has 2 statewide online schools or they can homeschool their kids.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't think APS has accurate data on the % of medically vulnerable kids, so I don't think the numbers people are citing here are accurate. Maybe people are assuming SPED = medically vulnerable? My kids are medically at risk. When we signed up for VLP last Spring I remember a question about why we were choosing VLP. I could only choose one even though more than one reason applied to us. I don't remember which one I chose.

APS doesn't. If you look at Fairfax, they have a virtual enrollment of 0.2% of its student body in its medical-only virtual program. APS has a 2.7% virtual enrollment in its open virtual program.

Fairfax worded the requirement in a way doctors were concerned anything less than boy-in-a-bubble getting a note might be viewed as malpractice. If this was a good faith argument from a numerically literate person, it would have acknowledged a large number of factors making any conclusions and comparisons foolish.

If.

Anonymous wrote:Honest question - would those who are supporting APS VPL today also support virtual education instead of building a 4th HS? Because that's the real reason VPL was created.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't think APS has accurate data on the % of medically vulnerable kids, so I don't think the numbers people are citing here are accurate. Maybe people are assuming SPED = medically vulnerable? My kids are medically at risk. When we signed up for VLP last Spring I remember a question about why we were choosing VLP. I could only choose one even though more than one reason applied to us. I don't remember which one I chose.

APS doesn't. If you look at Fairfax, they have a virtual enrollment of 0.2% of its student body in its medical-only virtual program. APS has a 2.7% virtual enrollment in its open virtual program.

Anonymous wrote:Can we audit APS?