Also, DL is not child care! Many teachers want to teach from home so they can watch their own kids. School administrators must remind teachers that they will have to make child care arrangements while they're on the clock. Child care is the responsibility of teachers and they should have thought of that before having kids.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Your kids. Your responsibility. Don’t put them off on teachers just cause you tired of dealing with em.

This is so laughable. It is like a grocery store worker saying, you're hungry? Your problem. Go grow some food.
Or a utility company saying "You want electricity?" "Go find some"

Grocery store workers do not grow food. They sell it to you.

Its still then refusing to do a key part of THEIR job (selling you food) and making it YOUR problem to figure out.

No, stupid. It isn't the same at all. There is no way for a grocery store worker to do his/her job remotely. There IS a way for a teacher to work remotely, and doing so saves lives and protects the health of others. The real issue is that you aren't satisfied with DL and have decided that even though you can get the "product" of the teachers' work either way, the advantage of non-DL outweighs risk to teachers' lives.

Then why ever go back to buildings if DL is just super awesome and great. Save a TON of money on buildings, supplies etc.

Poll:
Do you feel providing free education and educating the children of this country is an essential need?
If yes, then why aren't teachers essential workers going back to their jobs (keep in mind many essential workers are working outside of the home, Drs nurses, day care, utility etc)?
If no, then I think it is time we rethink and redefine our entire education system in this country and allocate those resources elsewhere, like to families who can use it to hire tutors, private schools, parent stay home to homeschool, pay for a pod, etc.

I think anyone who paints this as “parents want free childcare” or “teachers are lazy” are pretty simple minded. Yes, it’s more likely that families with ES children will have childcare issues, especially in this area where there are so many dual-income households. But at our daycare, fewer than half of families have returned. And I know plenty of families with MS/HS students who are really fretting, either because they’re at a critical transition year or for whom distance learning just wasn’t working in the spring. They’re grumbling about having to find tutors or asking their kids to drop to easier classes if they can’t afford the tutors or feel they can personally help.

While there are many teachers concerned about safety, many I know want to return, but are frustrated with the process and lack of transparency. Also varies by how DL went in the spring. The one I know that is most vocal about wanting to go back is an ES reading specialist- these are kids who need extra help already for one reason or another, and she felt that DL really failed for those kids in particular.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Your kids. Your responsibility. Don’t put them off on teachers just cause you tired of dealing with em.

This is so laughable. It is like a grocery store worker saying, you're hungry? Your problem. Go grow some food.
Or a utility company saying "You want electricity?" "Go find some"

Grocery store workers do not grow food. They sell it to you.

Its still then refusing to do a key part of THEIR job (selling you food) and making it YOUR problem to figure out.

No, stupid. It isn't the same at all. There is no way for a grocery store worker to do his/her job remotely. There IS a way for a teacher to work remotely, and doing so saves lives and protects the health of others. The real issue is that you aren't satisfied with DL and have decided that even though you can get the "product" of the teachers' work either way, the advantage of non-DL outweighs risk to teachers' lives.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Your kids. Your responsibility. Don’t put them off on teachers just cause you tired of dealing with em.

This is so laughable. It is like a grocery store worker saying, you're hungry? Your problem. Go grow some food.
Or a utility company saying "You want electricity?" "Go find some"

Or like a parent saying, “You’re worries about being exposed to a highly contagious and potentially deadly virus? Tough, watch my kids all day I’m stressed.”

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Your kids. Your responsibility. Don’t put them off on teachers just cause you tired of dealing with em.

This is so laughable. It is like a grocery store worker saying, you're hungry? Your problem. Go grow some food.
Or a utility company saying "You want electricity?" "Go find some"

Grocery store workers do not grow food. They sell it to you.

Its still then refusing to do a key part of THEIR job (selling you food) and making it YOUR problem to figure out.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Your kids. Your responsibility. Don’t put them off on teachers just cause you tired of dealing with em.

This is so laughable. It is like a grocery store worker saying, you're hungry? Your problem. Go grow some food.
Or a utility company saying "You want electricity?" "Go find some"

Grocery store workers do not grow food. They sell it to you.

Anonymous wrote:I'm a teacher and a parent.

I'm not scared to return to work in a school setting, but I don't see how we can teach a full group of students and I don't see how hybrid would really work. I could see returning to in school for a smaller group of selected students -- K-3rd grade. I always thought 4th-12th should distance learn and K-3 should be spread out among all the older kids schools.

That seems to make the most sense to me.

Of course, when I say return to schools, I mean when we are in a safe time to do so, with community spread of COVID down to 1 or 2 new cases, per 100,000 people, per day; and when we have enough tests and PPE to be reasonable secure.

We have NONE of the above in the DC area right now.

I do not want my own personal children going back to school until the above measures have been reached, either.

Your district would have to hire many, many more early ES teachers for than planned to work.

Anonymous wrote:Your kids. Your responsibility. Don’t put them off on teachers just cause you tired of dealing with em.

This is so laughable. It is like a grocery store worker saying, you're hungry? Your problem. Go grow some food.
Or a utility company saying "You want electricity?" "Go find some"

Anonymous wrote:I'm a teacher and a parent.

I'm not scared to return to work in a school setting, but I don't see how we can teach a full group of students and I don't see how hybrid would really work. I could see returning to in school for a smaller group of selected students -- K-3rd grade. I always thought 4th-12th should distance learn and K-3 should be spread out among all the older kids schools.

That seems to make the most sense to me.

Of course, when I say return to schools, I mean when we are in a safe time to do so, with community spread of COVID down to 1 or 2 new cases, per 100,000 people, per day; and when we have enough tests and PPE to be reasonable secure.

We have NONE of the above in the DC area right now.

I do not want my own personal children going back to school until the above measures have been reached, either.

So just a question- why is 1 or 2 cases per 100k acceptable to you? Not arguing with your post really, and I guess that number is not all that different than what Gayles came up with, but he pointed to cdc guidance that does not really exist. Other states like NY have set different metrics. It frustrates me that there’s isn’t a credible, national effort.

Anonymous wrote:The parents are exposed to their kids' germs either way. Also, they want to continue day drinking while WFH.

???

Kids don't spontaneously produce Covid. If kids are at home, they are less likely to pick it up than if they are at school. So this makes no sense. Obviously kids and their families would be at higher risk for getting Covid if they are going to school, just as teachers would be at higher risk if they were teaching in schools. That's OP's whole point, and it's valid. Why are parents so willing to send their kids to school if it increases the likelihood of contracting Covid (which it undoubtedly does)?

Also, good luck to any parent who is successfully day drinking while working full time from home and watching their kids! Sounds like hell.

The more reasonable explanation, which is also what OP is saying, is that teachers are advocating for their most ideal situation (WFH, which is both safer and more convenient for many) and parent's are advocating for their ideal situation (in-person school, which would help them with the burden of childcare while they WFH). No one is a villain here. It's a shitty situation. I am so confused about the vitriol expressed in both directions on DCUM. All the parents and teachers I know IRL (and most of the teachers I know are also parents), are more understanding and nuanced about it. Everyone empathizes with everyone else's struggle. Everyone's annoyed with the politicians and school administrators.

Your kids. Your responsibility. Don’t put them off on teachers just cause you tired of dealing with em.

Well, I'm high risk. I have an issue that means if I get Covid, chances are far greater for me that it will result in complications.

I have to work. So I'll be there. But I'm scared. And the SAHMs can STFU because I have to work no matter what I think. I no longer care what they think, and I know they don't care if I become ill or die.

I agree Teachers are really whiny. I have taught for 15 years, and I know we can be dramatic. Yet we are justifiably whiny for the right reason this time since our society's health is important.