Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The problem for those who are concerned about the (undeniably less safe) changes to IPL is that the Lafayette principal refused to explain what the teacher changes would be for virtual students, so parents are asked to make a “binding” decision that involves a cost-benefit analysis based on incomplete information.

Huh? It was abundantly clear. If your teacher is virtual and you are in person, or vice versa, you will switch teachers. The end.

Anonymous wrote:The problem for those who are concerned about the (undeniably less safe) changes to IPL is that the Lafayette principal refused to explain what the teacher changes would be for virtual students, so parents are asked to make a “binding” decision that involves a cost-benefit analysis based on incomplete information.

Anonymous wrote:The problem for those who are concerned about the (undeniably less safe) changes to IPL is that the Lafayette principal refused to explain what the teacher changes would be for virtual students, so parents are asked to make a “binding” decision that involves a cost-benefit analysis based on incomplete information.

Anonymous wrote:The problem for those who are concerned about the (undeniably less safe) changes to IPL is that the Lafayette principal refused to explain what the teacher changes would be for virtual students, so parents are asked to make a “binding” decision that involves a cost-benefit analysis based on incomplete information.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't get why those who don't want to go back care what others do. If you don't want to come back, stay virtual. Why are you even commenting?

Because with the way that our public education system is designed, the resource allocation to one area means less allocation to another. As was made abundantly clear in the council hearing today, the mayor is not designating funds to ensure that schools can cater to all of their needs, so they are forced to make choices. Separating the student population of the District of Columbia into two segments - In Person (majority white) and Distance Learning (majority non-white) - does not mean that the education provided to the two groups will be equal if the funding is not divided equitably.

Anonymous wrote:I don't get why those who don't want to go back care what others do. If you don't want to come back, stay virtual. Why are you even commenting?

Anonymous wrote:- If you have too many of the old school, entrenched WTU teachers who have been with DCPS for a long time and not performing well, then it won't work. They'll find a way to stay home. The truth is that WOTP gets better teachers and many of the entrenched, poorly performing WTU teachers wouldn't feel comfortable WOTP because they would be held to higher standards.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Major excitement! We can’t wait. One thing is puzzling. Classes of 22 will eat lunch together in classrooms. Is that safe?

That's not safe.

Anonymous wrote:Parent here from one of the schools opening 4 days/wk.

First, I do not begrudge anyone an in person learning opportunity. For all those who have new or existing learning opportunities that they want--congratulations and I wish you the best of health and education. That said, spare me the rants that my differing opinion (which is not going to impact your kids' opportunity) is ruining your life.

Here's my issues: We filled out a term 4 survey (currently all virtual) and we, with some hesitation, elected to request in person seats for our kids for the 4th term. We did this with the understanding that the kids would be cohorted in small groups and with 6ft distancing between desks. Now we are offered something totally different that, in my assessment, throws caution to the wind as cases are rising again, testing practices have been ridiculously reduced in the schools, variants are spreading and 75% of the kids in my kids' classes are gleefully announcing their spring break travel plans during morning meetings.

So, I am happy for those for whom this is an answer to prayers and desires. This is not what our family signed up for and I'm not sure that with our family and life circumstances we can take on this risk.

Anonymous wrote:Major excitement! We can’t wait. One thing is puzzling. Classes of 22 will eat lunch together in classrooms. Is that safe?

Anonymous wrote:
Parent here from one of the schools opening 4 days/wk.

First, I do not begrudge anyone an in person learning opportunity. For all those who have new or existing learning opportunities that they want--congratulations and I wish you the best of health and education. That said, spare me the rants that my differing opinion (which is not going to impact your kids' opportunity) is ruining your life.

Here's my issues: We filled out a term 4 survey (currently all virtual) and we, with some hesitation, elected to request in person seats for our kids for the 4th term. We did this with the understanding that the kids would be cohorted in small groups and with 6ft distancing between desks. Now we are offered something totally different that, in my assessment, throws caution to the wind as cases are rising again, testing practices have been ridiculously reduced in the schools, variants are spreading and 75% of the kids in my kids' classes are gleefully announcing their spring break travel plans during morning meetings.

So, I am happy for those for whom this is an answer to prayers and desires. This is not what our family signed up for and I'm not sure that with our family and life circumstances we can take on this risk.


Great! Then do virtual. The entire school should not cater to your family.