Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I like it and would definitely go for it.

I'd love to not have to worry about sending my kids in person or the crappy nature of online schooling.

You have no way of knowing if online schooling will be crappy.

LOL. My school district was all asynchronous this spring, for all grades. Everything was mandated P/F. There was a month “dead period” where the district declared teachers could not grade or assign work due to inequity.

Unfortunately my district was the same. As far as.I have heard, there still isn't a real plan to make fall better.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:With gap year -some kids (Redshirted in 2019) will start kindergarten at age 7.

Well any kid that was held back for any reason would have the same problem. I guess what can you do?

I mean this would be a problem in all grades - not just K. For any kid held back (redshirted or held back or whatever)

Anonymous wrote:With gap year -some kids (Redshirted in 2019) will start kindergarten at age 7.

Well any kid that was held back for any reason would have the same problem. I guess what can you do?

We need kids to be productive this year, even if it's less productive than normal, because it gives them something to do if we are stuck at home with them. Who wants their brains to mush?

We can't just do nothing. it's not good for them, it's hard for teachers and we can't have a year with twice as many kids.

Not practical at all.

It's a weird year and we are all just going to have to suck it up.

School districts and states are going to have to rewrite the standard per grade to account. The kids won’t cover 100% of the typical material this year. Maybe 50%, maybe 75% but there will be something there to learn.

What’s taught in any given grade or subject is subjectively determined at some point. No reason it can’t be adjusted.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What? It satisfies no one. There are a million reasons why. Let's start with:

Do you then tell the incoming class of K to just not attend school? If not, then you have a huge swell of kids to teach - who is paying for that?

They stay home and the federal government pays. Obviously.

Actually, this might be the stick that gets the federal government to enact truly universal prek 3-4 everywhere.

What I believe pp meant is that the following year would include all of the kindergarteners who sat out a year plus all of the next year’s kindergarteners. You would have a double sized bubble of kids moving through the school system for the next 13 years.

Obviously

So? That's better than the alternative, which is that most kids just lose a year of schooling.

Most kids aren’t losing a year of schooling. If you want to hold your kid back, go ahead. No one is stopping you.

Contrary to the threats we probably all got growing up - it's exceedingly difficult to hold a kid back. Lots of people are trying to stop you. And you can only do it once in a child's education. We fought tooth and nail to keep my daughter back, and would love to do it again, but there's no way that's possible.

I didn’t think we were dealing with reality in this thread...

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What? It satisfies no one. There are a million reasons why. Let's start with:

Do you then tell the incoming class of K to just not attend school? If not, then you have a huge swell of kids to teach - who is paying for that?

They stay home and the federal government pays. Obviously.

Actually, this might be the stick that gets the federal government to enact truly universal prek 3-4 everywhere.

What I believe pp meant is that the following year would include all of the kindergarteners who sat out a year plus all of the next year’s kindergarteners. You would have a double sized bubble of kids moving through the school system for the next 13 years.

Obviously

So? That's better than the alternative, which is that most kids just lose a year of schooling.

Most kids aren’t losing a year of schooling. If you want to hold your kid back, go ahead. No one is stopping you.

Contrary to the threats we probably all got growing up - it's exceedingly difficult to hold a kid back. Lots of people are trying to stop you. And you can only do it once in a child's education. We fought tooth and nail to keep my daughter back, and would love to do it again, but there's no way that's possible.

Still leaves two major issues: first, who’s watching kids under the age of 12 while their parents work? Second, twenty percent of families will still double down on tutoring, supplements, extracurricular, etc - specifically families with a stay at home parent (typically middle class or better) or money to hire people (wealthy). So you still end up with huge inequities.

Like, I’m not a tiger mom by any stretch, and we’ve been pretty chill this year about not worrying about school. But if I found out 3rd grade was “cancelled”, and I’m still working from home, I’m still going to hire a tutor cum nanny to spend a couple hours every day with my son so his brain doesn’t turn to mush. Even if he’s not following a specific school schedule.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I like it and would definitely go for it.

I'd love to not have to worry about sending my kids in person or the crappy nature of online schooling.

You have no way of knowing if online schooling will be crappy.

LOL. My school district was all asynchronous this spring, for all grades. Everything was mandated P/F. There was a month “dead period” where the district declared teachers could not grade or assign work due to inequity.

Anonymous wrote:Who is going to pay these sky high school taxes and then have no schooling? Are you proposing we just lay off all of the school staff for a year? That we pay them and then tell them not to do any teaching?

This. The ONLY way I’d support this is if the teachers were all laid off for the year. I’m not paying taxes so someone can collect a year of their salary without doing anything.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What? It satisfies no one. There are a million reasons why. Let's start with:

Do you then tell the incoming class of K to just not attend school? If not, then you have a huge swell of kids to teach - who is paying for that?

They stay home and the federal government pays. Obviously.

Actually, this might be the stick that gets the federal government to enact truly universal prek 3-4 everywhere.

What I believe pp meant is that the following year would include all of the kindergarteners who sat out a year plus all of the next year’s kindergarteners. You would have a double sized bubble of kids moving through the school system for the next 13 years.

Obviously

Redshirting would not be allowed under any circumstances for a year. That would reduce the size.