Anonymous wrote:What does it look like for a kid who does VA? Is it all day? Small classes? Interaction with peers?

My son is a 10th grader in the MVA and enjoys it. Classes are very small compared to in the building. He has some core classes under 10 students and none more than 20 students so the attention from the teacher and feedback on assignments has been much better than what we experienced in the traditional setting.

In the class, there's not a ton of peer interaction but the MVA is trying to do clubs and social Zoom rooms during the lunch period to give students that peer to peer interaction in a relaxed setting.

Overall it's been a great experience and allowed my son to just focus on school without all the distractions/drama of high school. MVA isn't for everyone but if your child is organized and self motivated, it is a great option.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Virtual school is not goid for young kids

https://amp.cnn.com/cnn/2021/03/26/health/cdc-remote-learning-kids-mental-health-wellness/index.html

This article is rambling nonsense: "Nearly 25% of parents whose children received virtual instruction or combined instruction reported worsened mental or emotional health in their children, compared to 16% of parents whose children received in-person instruction."

Perhaps the difference is parents were more involved with their kids daily lives to actually see what was going on. Or, perhaps the school was not the issue vs. the family situation.

Kids also have different learning styles and personalities. One of my kids did just fine with virtual, for my other it was a big struggle. Same parents, same attention given to both.

What is happening is VA is different than what happened during covid.

In what way really? I'm genuinely curious. Is it because it's an opt in model for students and staff?

Why all the drama? You don't care what's going on and if you do look at the website. Why would you want to take it away from children?

Are you saying it isn't better?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Virtual school is not goid for young kids

https://amp.cnn.com/cnn/2021/03/26/health/cdc-remote-learning-kids-mental-health-wellness/index.html

This article is rambling nonsense: "Nearly 25% of parents whose children received virtual instruction or combined instruction reported worsened mental or emotional health in their children, compared to 16% of parents whose children received in-person instruction."

Perhaps the difference is parents were more involved with their kids daily lives to actually see what was going on. Or, perhaps the school was not the issue vs. the family situation.

Kids also have different learning styles and personalities. One of my kids did just fine with virtual, for my other it was a big struggle. Same parents, same attention given to both.

It's just really tiresome when posters act like their kid being good at virtual school is some proof of moral superiority or something. Congratulations kid being able to sit still in front of a computer for 6 hours a day

Whoa, not following your logic, PP just said it works for some and not others. Its not about who’s morally superior. It’s so nice that there is an option for kids who need it and I hope it continues.

I'm responding to people who claim here and other threads that the reason their kids thrive in virtual was because "they were more involved in their child's education "

Except if you have a very independent child, it does take a lot of parental involvement.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Virtual school is not goid for young kids

https://amp.cnn.com/cnn/2021/03/26/health/cdc-remote-learning-kids-mental-health-wellness/index.html

This article is rambling nonsense: "Nearly 25% of parents whose children received virtual instruction or combined instruction reported worsened mental or emotional health in their children, compared to 16% of parents whose children received in-person instruction."

Perhaps the difference is parents were more involved with their kids daily lives to actually see what was going on. Or, perhaps the school was not the issue vs. the family situation.

Kids also have different learning styles and personalities. One of my kids did just fine with virtual, for my other it was a big struggle. Same parents, same attention given to both.

What is happening is VA is different than what happened during covid.

In what way really? I'm genuinely curious. Is it because it's an opt in kodel for students and staff?

Why all the drama? You don't care what's going on and if you do look at the website. Why would you want to take it away from children?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Virtual school is not goid for young kids

https://amp.cnn.com/cnn/2021/03/26/health/cdc-remote-learning-kids-mental-health-wellness/index.html

This article is rambling nonsense: "Nearly 25% of parents whose children received virtual instruction or combined instruction reported worsened mental or emotional health in their children, compared to 16% of parents whose children received in-person instruction."

Perhaps the difference is parents were more involved with their kids daily lives to actually see what was going on. Or, perhaps the school was not the issue vs. the family situation.

Kids also have different learning styles and personalities. One of my kids did just fine with virtual, for my other it was a big struggle. Same parents, same attention given to both.

What is happening is VA is different than what happened during covid.

In what way really? I'm genuinely curious. Is it because it's an opt in kodel for students and staff?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why is this so triggering for some people?

If virtual school wouldn't be a good fit for your family, don't worry about it!

I wouldn't choose it and would never want to go back to teaching young kids online (I'm a teacher), but other people can make different choices and that's okay.

I used to think that but I think with the light of the record level of teacher shortages it just seems like a big waste of resources to have a whole virtual school when this could be farmed out to k12 or something

There are no private companies doing what VA does and how they do it. Its far cheaper to run a VA than in person school.

It would be cheaper to contract out to k12 or something.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Virtual school is not goid for young kids

https://amp.cnn.com/cnn/2021/03/26/health/cdc-remote-learning-kids-mental-health-wellness/index.html

This article is rambling nonsense: "Nearly 25% of parents whose children received virtual instruction or combined instruction reported worsened mental or emotional health in their children, compared to 16% of parents whose children received in-person instruction."

Perhaps the difference is parents were more involved with their kids daily lives to actually see what was going on. Or, perhaps the school was not the issue vs. the family situation.

Kids also have different learning styles and personalities. One of my kids did just fine with virtual, for my other it was a big struggle. Same parents, same attention given to both.

It's just really tiresome when posters act like their kid being good at virtual school is some proof of moral superiority or something. Congratulations kid being able to sit still in front of a computer for 6 hours a day

Whoa, not following your logic, PP just said it works for some and not others. Its not about who’s morally superior. It’s so nice that there is an option for kids who need it and I hope it continues.

I'm responding to people who claim here and other threads that the reason their kids thrive in virtual was because "they were more involved in their child's education "

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:ESSER funds run through 9/30/24. It was pretty clear VA would continue next year. It's the year after that's in jeopardy.

Or really, the first year after 2024 when there's a budget crisis.

Really, who told you this?

Did you think ESSER would be ongoing? Haven’t you been paying attention to the board’s budget meetings?

Can you show us where MCPS has said they are shutting down VA in 2024?

Can you show us a budget for the 2024-2025 school year showing the VA being funded?

If you listened to the Board meetings you would hear its a long-term project. There is no budget for the 2024-25 school year yet. So, can YOU show us where they are shutting it down? Why do you think it needs to be shut down? Can you show us the information where the kids in VA are not doing as well as those in person?

I never said it needs to be shut down.But if you’ve been paying attention to board meetings, then you should know that they still don’t know how they’re going to balance the budget when ESSER funds end.

If it's important to them, they will find the money, just like they do for all their other pet projects. I hope they keep VA and the free tutoring.

I think that’s true, but we don’t know how important it is, particularly to the board members. And particularly as VA enrollment numbers drop. And as the budget gets harder to balance.

My expectation is that VA numbers statewide will drop to a level that will make it impractical for individual districts to continue their own virtual programs.

Right- it would be more efficient in the long run for the state of MD to run a virtual program (other states do this). I haven't really seen any indication that the state plans to do this, but with the change in admin, who knows.

It wouldn't work at all.

Of course it would— MSDE could operate it themselves with additional funding, or they could outsource it to K12. I’m inclined to say it would be better for MSDE to operate it, but that probably depends on the total number of students across the state.

K12 is not a real online school like va is.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why is this so triggering for some people?

If virtual school wouldn't be a good fit for your family, don't worry about it!

I wouldn't choose it and would never want to go back to teaching young kids online (I'm a teacher), but other people can make different choices and that's okay.

At some point it will come down to budgeting priorities so yeah, I have an interest in how MCPS spends limited resources. Until then I really don’t care.

Virtual would cost MCPS less, not more, so if you are concerned about how money is spent, you should push for VA.

Virtual school would be cheaper if you got rid of regular schools, but that’s obviously not going to happen. The schools themselves, and the support infrastructure/staff to operate them, are sunk costs. Whether it saves MCPS money to have kids in virtual school will ultimately depend on staffing ratios. But as students drop out of VA, per pupil staffing costs will increase.

No, if students drop out, they have staffing reductions. Given there is less staff, no buses, no in person activities or extras, no field trips and no building, and it reduces class sizes for overcrowded in person schools why do you care if another chooses it.

Or, how about fixing the issues and making it safe for those who choose it to return their kids in person.,,,

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why is this so triggering for some people?

If virtual school wouldn't be a good fit for your family, don't worry about it!

I wouldn't choose it and would never want to go back to teaching young kids online (I'm a teacher), but other people can make different choices and that's okay.

At some point it will come down to budgeting priorities so yeah, I have an interest in how MCPS spends limited resources. Until then I really don’t care.

Virtual would cost MCPS less, not more, so if you are concerned about how money is spent, you should push for VA.

Virtual school would be cheaper if you got rid of regular schools, but that’s obviously not going to happen. The schools themselves, and the support infrastructure/staff to operate them, are sunk costs. Whether it saves MCPS money to have kids in virtual school will ultimately depend on staffing ratios. But as students drop out of VA, per pupil staffing costs will increase.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:ESSER funds run through 9/30/24. It was pretty clear VA would continue next year. It's the year after that's in jeopardy.

Or really, the first year after 2024 when there's a budget crisis.

Really, who told you this?

Did you think ESSER would be ongoing? Haven’t you been paying attention to the board’s budget meetings?

Can you show us where MCPS has said they are shutting down VA in 2024?

Can you show us a budget for the 2024-2025 school year showing the VA being funded?

If you listened to the Board meetings you would hear its a long-term project. There is no budget for the 2024-25 school year yet. So, can YOU show us where they are shutting it down? Why do you think it needs to be shut down? Can you show us the information where the kids in VA are not doing as well as those in person?

I never said it needs to be shut down.But if you’ve been paying attention to board meetings, then you should know that they still don’t know how they’re going to balance the budget when ESSER funds end.

If it's important to them, they will find the money, just like they do for all their other pet projects. I hope they keep VA and the free tutoring.

I think that’s true, but we don’t know how important it is, particularly to the board members. And particularly as VA enrollment numbers drop. And as the budget gets harder to balance.

My expectation is that VA numbers statewide will drop to a level that will make it impractical for individual districts to continue their own virtual programs.

Right- it would be more efficient in the long run for the state of MD to run a virtual program (other states do this). I haven't really seen any indication that the state plans to do this, but with the change in admin, who knows.

It wouldn't work at all.

Of course it would— MSDE could operate it themselves with additional funding, or they could outsource it to K12. I’m inclined to say it would be better for MSDE to operate it, but that probably depends on the total number of students across the state.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:ESSER funds run through 9/30/24. It was pretty clear VA would continue next year. It's the year after that's in jeopardy.

Or really, the first year after 2024 when there's a budget crisis.

Really, who told you this?

Did you think ESSER would be ongoing? Haven’t you been paying attention to the board’s budget meetings?

Can you show us where MCPS has said they are shutting down VA in 2024?

Can you show us a budget for the 2024-2025 school year showing the VA being funded?

If you listened to the Board meetings you would hear its a long-term project. There is no budget for the 2024-25 school year yet. So, can YOU show us where they are shutting it down? Why do you think it needs to be shut down? Can you show us the information where the kids in VA are not doing as well as those in person?

I never said it needs to be shut down.But if you’ve been paying attention to board meetings, then you should know that they still don’t know how they’re going to balance the budget when ESSER funds end.

If it's important to them, they will find the money, just like they do for all their other pet projects. I hope they keep VA and the free tutoring.

I think that’s true, but we don’t know how important it is, particularly to the board members. And particularly as VA enrollment numbers drop. And as the budget gets harder to balance.

My expectation is that VA numbers statewide will drop to a level that will make it impractical for individual districts to continue their own virtual programs.

Right- it would be more efficient in the long run for the state of MD to run a virtual program (other states do this). I haven't really seen any indication that the state plans to do this, but with the change in admin, who knows.

It wouldn't work at all.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why is this so triggering for some people?

If virtual school wouldn't be a good fit for your family, don't worry about it!

I wouldn't choose it and would never want to go back to teaching young kids online (I'm a teacher), but other people can make different choices and that's okay.

I used to think that but I think with the light of the record level of teacher shortages it just seems like a big waste of resources to have a whole virtual school when this could be farmed out to k12 or something

There are no private companies doing what VA does and how they do it. Its far cheaper to run a VA than in person school.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why is this so triggering for some people?

If virtual school wouldn't be a good fit for your family, don't worry about it!

I wouldn't choose it and would never want to go back to teaching young kids online (I'm a teacher), but other people can make different choices and that's okay.

At some point it will come down to budgeting priorities so yeah, I have an interest in how MCPS spends limited resources. Until then I really don’t care.

Virtual would cost MCPS less, not more, so if you are concerned about how money is spent, you should push for VA.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Virtual school is not goid for young kids

https://amp.cnn.com/cnn/2021/03/26/health/cdc-remote-learning-kids-mental-health-wellness/index.html

This article is rambling nonsense: "Nearly 25% of parents whose children received virtual instruction or combined instruction reported worsened mental or emotional health in their children, compared to 16% of parents whose children received in-person instruction."

Perhaps the difference is parents were more involved with their kids daily lives to actually see what was going on. Or, perhaps the school was not the issue vs. the family situation.

Kids also have different learning styles and personalities. One of my kids did just fine with virtual, for my other it was a big struggle. Same parents, same attention given to both.

It's just really tiresome when posters act like their kid being good at virtual school is some proof of moral superiority or something. Congratulations kid being able to sit still in front of a computer for 6 hours a day

Whoa, not following your logic, PP just said it works for some and not others. Its not about who’s morally superior. It’s so nice that there is an option for kids who need it and I hope it continues.