Anonymous wrote:I know everyone is wrapped up in how this effects them, their kids are falling behind, economic destruction, etc. and just remember who we are asking to make the right decision....DCPS. The system that can’t handle snow days, the system that lost head start funding (b/c of horrible inaction), can’t get background checks on employees done among lots of other problems. They aren’t gonna make a great decision. May 15th will come and either they will kick the cab down the road or make some crazy decision that pisses everyone off and everyone freaks out. Buy masks for your kids, be ready for teachers to wear masks and be ready to do what is what for your family. Dcps has rarely made good decisions and I doubt they will make one here. Be ready for in school learning, staggered schedules and closures. There is nothing you can do about it so just accept it for what DCPS is.
Anonymous wrote:I think we need to prepare and plan for the worst and that would be extending the distant learning for next year.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Yes and those people are also going to have to adjust. If you have two jobs that can’t be done from home then one of you will have to quit and look for another job. If you are a single parent household you’ll have to find a job that can be done from home at least part time.
Things aren’t magically going back to normal no one is inconvenienced.
We’re not talking about “inconveniences” you’re talking about people quitting their careers. Do you understand the economic, social and psychological effects of that? Or are you just a SAHM?
Anonymous wrote:Yes and those people are also going to have to adjust. If you have two jobs that can’t be done from home then one of you will have to quit and look for another job. If you are a single parent household you’ll have to find a job that can be done from home at least part time.
Things aren’t magically going back to normal no one is inconvenienced.
Anonymous wrote:Yes and those people are also going to have to adjust. If you have two jobs that can’t be done from home then one of you will have to quit and look for another job. If you are a single parent household you’ll have to find a job that can be done from home at least part time.
Things aren’t magically going back to normal no one is inconvenienced.
Anonymous wrote:People are ignoring that businesses will have to be flexible with their employees. The school district can only be so flexible because of the amount of children it services. If you need to work from home every other day then you need to work from home every other day.
Some two income households are going to have to become single income households and downsize. You can’t expect that the world will just bounce back so you can maintain your lifestyle. This is an unprecedented emergency. Things are changing.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Kids receiving services should/will go back first.
Regular kids? Who the hell knows?
This type of reasoning bothers me. To put it in a stark way, the kids who are non verbal and unlikely to be largely productive members of society as adults will be able to attend school, but the future doctors/ nurses/ teachers/ etc will be made to sit out. How can a society function if this is our priority?
I know this sounds cold hearted. I’m thinking big picture on purpose with my musings. But what if hospitals functioned the same way- in Italy for example if 2 people needed a hospital bed and one was 85 and had heart disease and one was 30 and healthy, the 30 year old got it. It seems like with schools this plan would only offer in person education to the most frail.
What an absolutely disgusting thing to say. You should be embarrassed. You would never say that in real life and can only say this on an anonymous forum. People like you disgust me.
I wouldn’t, because it would upset people obviously as evidenced by your response. But the truth is if only 4 kids can get science instruction in person and 20 kids need it, which 4 should be chosen? The kids with an aptitude for science or the kids with significant learning disabilities? Ask 100 people anonymously and see what the answer is/
All 20 should get distance learning. Aptitude for science or not, that doesn’t make one kid more deserving of instruction.
So even if there is ability to give 4 out of 20 in person learning, you maintain that NOBODY should get it? If everyone can’t? Even if by random lottery?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Kids receiving services should/will go back first.
Regular kids? Who the hell knows?
This type of reasoning bothers me. To put it in a stark way, the kids who are non verbal and unlikely to be largely productive members of society as adults will be able to attend school, but the future doctors/ nurses/ teachers/ etc will be made to sit out. How can a society function if this is our priority?
I know this sounds cold hearted. I’m thinking big picture on purpose with my musings. But what if hospitals functioned the same way- in Italy for example if 2 people needed a hospital bed and one was 85 and had heart disease and one was 30 and healthy, the 30 year old got it. It seems like with schools this plan would only offer in person education to the most frail.
What an absolutely disgusting thing to say. You should be embarrassed. You would never say that in real life and can only say this on an anonymous forum. People like you disgust me.
I wouldn’t, because it would upset people obviously as evidenced by your response. But the truth is if only 4 kids can get science instruction in person and 20 kids need it, which 4 should be chosen? The kids with an aptitude for science or the kids with significant learning disabilities? Ask 100 people anonymously and see what the answer is/
All 20 should get distance learning. Aptitude for science or not, that doesn’t make one kid more deserving of instruction.
So even if there is ability to give 4 out of 20 in person learning, you maintain that NOBODY should get it? If everyone can’t? Even if by random lottery?
NP. Only serving 4 kids in person is a complete waste of resources and this discussion is stupid.
I am not sure the parents of the 4 kids chosen would agree
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Kids receiving services should/will go back first.
Regular kids? Who the hell knows?
This type of reasoning bothers me. To put it in a stark way, the kids who are non verbal and unlikely to be largely productive members of society as adults will be able to attend school, but the future doctors/ nurses/ teachers/ etc will be made to sit out. How can a society function if this is our priority?
I know this sounds cold hearted. I’m thinking big picture on purpose with my musings. But what if hospitals functioned the same way- in Italy for example if 2 people needed a hospital bed and one was 85 and had heart disease and one was 30 and healthy, the 30 year old got it. It seems like with schools this plan would only offer in person education to the most frail.
What an absolutely disgusting thing to say. You should be embarrassed. You would never say that in real life and can only say this on an anonymous forum. People like you disgust me.
I wouldn’t, because it would upset people obviously as evidenced by your response. But the truth is if only 4 kids can get science instruction in person and 20 kids need it, which 4 should be chosen? The kids with an aptitude for science or the kids with significant learning disabilities? Ask 100 people anonymously and see what the answer is/
All 20 should get distance learning. Aptitude for science or not, that doesn’t make one kid more deserving of instruction.
So even if there is ability to give 4 out of 20 in person learning, you maintain that NOBODY should get it? If everyone can’t? Even if by random lottery?
NP. Only serving 4 kids in person is a complete waste of resources and this discussion is stupid.