Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm in favor of taking care of the most vulnerable. Bring back the low income and IEP kids and others identified by staff, spread them out over all the schools and the rest of us somehow manage because we are decent human beings and we take care of the weakest amongst us be they physically at risk of dying of needing extra resources to learn. Accept that maybe our kids won't get every single advantage to which we think they are entitled but they will still be ok and maybe the gift they will get is understanding that we rise or fall together.

F u

WoW - it is funny how upsetting you find kindness.

PP’s response wasn’t appropriate but do you understand that perpetual DL isn’t really an option for many, especially the disadvantaged? It seems like your heart is in the right place but you are considering only the educationally and medically fragile and not the economically or socially disadvantaged.

Except that I explicitly said those kids should be included. See bolded. The idea that everything should be the same for everyone is a big part of the problem.

It didn't used to be such a radical idea that all kids need school.

Don’t be obtuse - of course all kids need school, but when there is a scarcity of resources how do you allocate them? There is a significant set of children in MCPS who are fully able to get an adequate education with the current DL and support from Family members. There is another set who cannot get an adequate education by those means - so if we don’t have the resources to teach them all optimally, why not direct our resources to those most in need while the others get good enough. What I’m advocating is putting your money where your mouth is an accepting something slightly less so that others can have their most basic needs met. I find it funny that all of a sudden everyone here is so deeply concerned about the underprivileged. My children have more than enough - why is it that others like me can’t give a bit for the greater good? The elephants walk at the pace of the slowest member of the herd.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Don’t be obtuse - of course all kids need school, but when there is a scarcity of resources how do you allocate them? There is a significant set of children in MCPS who are fully able to get an adequate education with the current DL and support from Family members. There is another set who cannot get an adequate education by those means - so if we don’t have the resources to teach them all optimally, why not direct our resources to those most in need while the others get good enough. What I’m advocating is putting your money where your mouth is an accepting something slightly less so that others can have their most basic needs met. I find it funny that all of a sudden everyone here is so deeply concerned about the underprivileged. My children have more than enough - why is it that others like me can’t give a bit for the greater good? The elephants walk at the pace of the slowest member of the herd.

Says who?

My teenagers have family support, sufficient technology, no material worries, and no special needs, and what they got in the second half of Q3 and all of Q4 was not an adequate education. So, I'm glad that your children had more than enough, with respect to school for March through June. But mine didn't.

Well then you aren’t like me. I am actually advocating FOR you. If your kids can’t do it then they should be in school. As I said I would gladly sacrifice some for the greater good.

No, you're advocating for poor kids, kids who are English-language learners, and kids who have special needs.

Parents who think education through the computer is working for their kids should be welcome to keep their kids home. Everybody else should have the option of sending their kids to school.

In my original post I indicated that other kids identified by staff should be returned. I find it surprising that all of your teenagers with no special needs cannot manage - is that true or are you just selfishly pushing your way to the trough. I find it hard to believe that your kids suffer the same challenges as the low income, special needs and ESOL kids.

Anonymous wrote:

And every child should have a loving, safe home - but we don't have the resources to give everyone everything that they want. What you are doing is standing outside in the middle of a drought saying that it should rain - 'aint gonna make it rain. So how do we best get through this? I purport that we should do our best to help the most disadvantaged and the rest of us dig deeper and/or sacrifice some. Why are you so unwilling to give up even the smallest bit of yours to help your community? You're basically telling the starving kid that yes they can have some food just after your kids have eaten their fill.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Don’t be obtuse - of course all kids need school, but when there is a scarcity of resources how do you allocate them? There is a significant set of children in MCPS who are fully able to get an adequate education with the current DL and support from Family members. There is another set who cannot get an adequate education by those means - so if we don’t have the resources to teach them all optimally, why not direct our resources to those most in need while the others get good enough. What I’m advocating is putting your money where your mouth is an accepting something slightly less so that others can have their most basic needs met. I find it funny that all of a sudden everyone here is so deeply concerned about the underprivileged. My children have more than enough - why is it that others like me can’t give a bit for the greater good? The elephants walk at the pace of the slowest member of the herd.

Says who?

My teenagers have family support, sufficient technology, no material worries, and no special needs, and what they got in the second half of Q3 and all of Q4 was not an adequate education. So, I'm glad that your children had more than enough, with respect to school for March through June. But mine didn't.

Well then you aren’t like me. I am actually advocating FOR you. If your kids can’t do it then they should be in school. As I said I would gladly sacrifice some for the greater good.

No, you're advocating for poor kids, kids who are English-language learners, and kids who have special needs.

Parents who think education through the computer is working for their kids should be welcome to keep their kids home. Everybody else should have the option of sending their kids to school.

In my original post I indicated that other kids identified by staff should be returned. I find it surprising that all of your teenagers with no special needs cannot manage - is that true or are you just selfishly pushing your way to the trough. I find it hard to believe that your kids suffer the same challenges as the low income, special needs and ESOL kids.

PP with the teenagers. You may find it surprising, but that's how it was. Do my kids suffer the same challenges as the low-income, special needs, and ESOL kids? No, of course not. Did the on-line school work for my kids? No, it did not. Is it selfish to want my kids to receive an adequate education from our public school system? I don't think so. I'm certainly not saying, "My kids should go to school and too bad for those other kids." I think ALL kids should receive an adequate education from our public school system.

And again, if yours are receiving an adequate education on-line from our public school system, that's great, and you should have the option of keeping them home. More space at school for everybody else.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Don’t be obtuse - of course all kids need school, but when there is a scarcity of resources how do you allocate them? There is a significant set of children in MCPS who are fully able to get an adequate education with the current DL and support from Family members. There is another set who cannot get an adequate education by those means - so if we don’t have the resources to teach them all optimally, why not direct our resources to those most in need while the others get good enough. What I’m advocating is putting your money where your mouth is an accepting something slightly less so that others can have their most basic needs met. I find it funny that all of a sudden everyone here is so deeply concerned about the underprivileged. My children have more than enough - why is it that others like me can’t give a bit for the greater good? The elephants walk at the pace of the slowest member of the herd.

Says who?

My teenagers have family support, sufficient technology, no material worries, and no special needs, and what they got in the second half of Q3 and all of Q4 was not an adequate education. So, I'm glad that your children had more than enough, with respect to school for March through June. But mine didn't.

Well then you aren’t like me. I am actually advocating FOR you. If your kids can’t do it then they should be in school. As I said I would gladly sacrifice some for the greater good.

No, you're advocating for poor kids, kids who are English-language learners, and kids who have special needs.

Parents who think education through the computer is working for their kids should be welcome to keep their kids home. Everybody else should have the option of sending their kids to school.

In my original post I indicated that other kids identified by staff should be returned. I find it surprising that all of your teenagers with no special needs cannot manage - is that true or are you just selfishly pushing your way to the trough. I find it hard to believe that your kids suffer the same challenges as the low income, special needs and ESOL kids.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Don’t be obtuse - of course all kids need school, but when there is a scarcity of resources how do you allocate them? There is a significant set of children in MCPS who are fully able to get an adequate education with the current DL and support from Family members. There is another set who cannot get an adequate education by those means - so if we don’t have the resources to teach them all optimally, why not direct our resources to those most in need while the others get good enough. What I’m advocating is putting your money where your mouth is an accepting something slightly less so that others can have their most basic needs met. I find it funny that all of a sudden everyone here is so deeply concerned about the underprivileged. My children have more than enough - why is it that others like me can’t give a bit for the greater good? The elephants walk at the pace of the slowest member of the herd.

Says who?

My teenagers have family support, sufficient technology, no material worries, and no special needs, and what they got in the second half of Q3 and all of Q4 was not an adequate education. So, I'm glad that your children had more than enough, with respect to school for March through June. But mine didn't.

Well then you aren’t like me. I am actually advocating FOR you. If your kids can’t do it then they should be in school. As I said I would gladly sacrifice some for the greater good.

No, you're advocating for poor kids, kids who are English-language learners, and kids who have special needs.

Parents who think education through the computer is working for their kids should be welcome to keep their kids home. Everybody else should have the option of sending their kids to school.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Don’t be obtuse - of course all kids need school, but when there is a scarcity of resources how do you allocate them? There is a significant set of children in MCPS who are fully able to get an adequate education with the current DL and support from Family members. There is another set who cannot get an adequate education by those means - so if we don’t have the resources to teach them all optimally, why not direct our resources to those most in need while the others get good enough. What I’m advocating is putting your money where your mouth is an accepting something slightly less so that others can have their most basic needs met. I find it funny that all of a sudden everyone here is so deeply concerned about the underprivileged. My children have more than enough - why is it that others like me can’t give a bit for the greater good? The elephants walk at the pace of the slowest member of the herd.

Says who?

My teenagers have family support, sufficient technology, no material worries, and no special needs, and what they got in the second half of Q3 and all of Q4 was not an adequate education. So, I'm glad that your children had more than enough, with respect to school for March through June. But mine didn't.

Well then you aren’t like me. I am actually advocating FOR you. If your kids can’t do it then they should be in school. As I said I would gladly sacrifice some for the greater good.

No, you're advocating for poor kids, kids who are English-language learners, and kids who have special needs.

Parents who think education through the computer is working for their kids should be welcome to keep their kids home. Everybody else should have the option of sending their kids to school.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Don’t be obtuse - of course all kids need school, but when there is a scarcity of resources how do you allocate them? There is a significant set of children in MCPS who are fully able to get an adequate education with the current DL and support from Family members. There is another set who cannot get an adequate education by those means - so if we don’t have the resources to teach them all optimally, why not direct our resources to those most in need while the others get good enough. What I’m advocating is putting your money where your mouth is an accepting something slightly less so that others can have their most basic needs met. I find it funny that all of a sudden everyone here is so deeply concerned about the underprivileged. My children have more than enough - why is it that others like me can’t give a bit for the greater good? The elephants walk at the pace of the slowest member of the herd.

Says who?

My teenagers have family support, sufficient technology, no material worries, and no special needs, and what they got in the second half of Q3 and all of Q4 was not an adequate education. So, I'm glad that your children had more than enough, with respect to school for March through June. But mine didn't.

Well then you aren’t like me. I am actually advocating FOR you. If your kids can’t do it then they should be in school. As I said I would gladly sacrifice some for the greater good.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Don’t be obtuse - of course all kids need school, but when there is a scarcity of resources how do you allocate them? There is a significant set of children in MCPS who are fully able to get an adequate education with the current DL and support from Family members. There is another set who cannot get an adequate education by those means - so if we don’t have the resources to teach them all optimally, why not direct our resources to those most in need while the others get good enough. What I’m advocating is putting your money where your mouth is an accepting something slightly less so that others can have their most basic needs met. I find it funny that all of a sudden everyone here is so deeply concerned about the underprivileged. My children have more than enough - why is it that others like me can’t give a bit for the greater good? The elephants walk at the pace of the slowest member of the herd.

Says who?

My teenagers have family support, sufficient technology, no material worries, and no special needs, and what they got in the second half of Q3 and all of Q4 was not an adequate education. So, I'm glad that your children had more than enough, with respect to school for March through June. But mine didn't.

Anonymous wrote:

Don’t be obtuse - of course all kids need school, but when there is a scarcity of resources how do you allocate them? There is a significant set of children in MCPS who are fully able to get an adequate education with the current DL and support from Family members. There is another set who cannot get an adequate education by those means - so if we don’t have the resources to teach them all optimally, why not direct our resources to those most in need while the others get good enough. What I’m advocating is putting your money where your mouth is an accepting something slightly less so that others can have their most basic needs met. I find it funny that all of a sudden everyone here is so deeply concerned about the underprivileged. My children have more than enough - why is it that others like me can’t give a bit for the greater good? The elephants walk at the pace of the slowest member of the herd.

Anonymous wrote:

I would not be opposed to sending elementary kids back and spreading them throughout the middle and high schools while the bulk of those kids do DL.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm in favor of taking care of the most vulnerable. Bring back the low income and IEP kids and others identified by staff, spread them out over all the schools and the rest of us somehow manage because we are decent human beings and we take care of the weakest amongst us be they physically at risk of dying of needing extra resources to learn. Accept that maybe our kids won't get every single advantage to which we think they are entitled but they will still be ok and maybe the gift they will get is understanding that we rise or fall together.

F u

WoW - it is funny how upsetting you find kindness.

PP’s response wasn’t appropriate but do you understand that perpetual DL isn’t really an option for many, especially the disadvantaged? It seems like your heart is in the right place but you are considering only the educationally and medically fragile and not the economically or socially disadvantaged.

Except that I explicitly said those kids should be included. See bolded. The idea that everything should be the same for everyone is a big part of the problem.

It didn't used to be such a radical idea that all kids need school.

Don’t be obtuse - of course all kids need school, but when there is a scarcity of resources how do you allocate them? There is a significant set of children in MCPS who are fully able to get an adequate education with the current DL and support from Family members. There is another set who cannot get an adequate education by those means - so if we don’t have the resources to teach them all optimally, why not direct our resources to those most in need while the others get good enough. What I’m advocating is putting your money where your mouth is an accepting something slightly less so that others can have their most basic needs met. I find it funny that all of a sudden everyone here is so deeply concerned about the underprivileged. My children have more than enough - why is it that others like me can’t give a bit for the greater good? The elephants walk at the pace of the slowest member of the herd.

NP. And that set includes the vast majority of elementary school kids - not just lower SES ones.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think we have to plan for the full year. Sorry to burst your bubbles, but plan for the worst, hope for the best.

Huh? No, if MCPS plans for the worst, then we'll all have no school for at least another year.

What I mean is, you as a parent, need to plan for the worst, hope for the best.

Another thing that I need to do as a parent: advocate for education for all kids, not just mine.