Anonymous wrote:Here's the mentality we are dealing with. A woman I know from my kids' school, (upper class wealthy white family with 2 kids in a charter) relentlessly coopted ward 8 voices and claimed to be speaking for POC (even though POC would literally confront you on your page) about the harms to that population through school closing. Even when people would say "actually, POC are more at risk from this disease and actually are the ones who want the virtual option) would say all the reasons why her opinion on their needs was more right than the parents. Despite all this, same person just posted about "joy and relief" in the air with kids going back to school...when a friend said to the contrary, many of us were worried, this person doled out unsolicited advice to friends, telling them to avoid mainstream media and read Emily Oster so they can be less anxious. I mean honestly, this is what we are dealing with, and this person has lots of free time and is organizing, organizing, organizing. Reason to post this is that, this is just one person. For every other person actively trying to limit the ability of scared parents (JUSTIFIABLY scared parents including the ones with medically vulnerable family members at home but also just any parent has a damn good reason to be wary given Delta's hospitalization rate for kids), just know we see you all in real life, and while we may not say something, we think so much less of you for what you're doing to take away OUR kids right to be safe - making us choose between their safety and their education. Literally ZERO people in the past 10 - 20 pages have advocated for "no in person school." you're just not even willing to share the table scraps that Covid has left all of us, and truly, you should be damn ashamed of your greed. This is not a zero sum game, DCPS made a foolish, bad decision, propped up by all the petitions and letter writing of people like this, who are COVID kid impact deniers. Best wishes to your kids, truly, but as for you, you suck.

Anonymous wrote:Look, I think it would be fine for you to have virtual for both of your kids. But don’t claim we have no idea what homeschooling means. I am a former education researcher who specialized in unschooling and homeschooling. What happened last year was essentially a combination of both. Depended on your school offerings

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:PG isn’t comparable in that they don’t have half of kids attending charters. Logistically a very different story.

That makes things EASIER for DCPS.

No, offering a virtual option at every school means charters as well, and no central option for the entirety of DC.

I also think charters (and the entire lottery system, for that matter) inhibit DCPS's ability to offer strong centralized leadership as PGPS has. There are so many competing interests in DCPS, it's very hard to unite school communities behind any big idea.

I also think the way DC public schooling is structured contributes to a culture of families not really caring about each other on a basic level. You compete in a lottery for spots, even IB spots at the PK level can be competitive. And then you have school themselves competing with one another for resources. It's a system that isolates families within it. And I think that's one reason you see some of the attitudes on display on this thread and in the whole IPL versus virtual debate. There is always a sense that someone is trying to take something away from you, whether it's a slot at a school or resources or access to a program. That may not be the intention of the system, but that's the effect.

So now parents who have the means to keep their kids virtual want to do so. And I get that, honestly. If I had a way of keeping my kid out of school this year I'd be seriously considering it. The problem is that I don't have that option -- for me, it's in person public school or just sheer misery (maybe job loss, maybe a mental breakdown, it's hard to say at this point). And when I see parents agitating for virtual options in a way that feels designed to undermine in person schooling, yeah, I get anxious. Because I need in person school. Like NEED it.

I wish DCPS could figure out a way to do this that gave everyone what the wanted and needed. But I'm afraid they won't (they never do) and I don't want to wind up with the short end of the stick this time. I can't afford it, frankly.

I’m one of the virtual option proponents and I agree with almost everything you say, but would offer that I and many others I know that are pushing for virtual do not want to remove the option for IPL. In fact I don’t even want simulcast or every school to have virtual as that works less well for everyone (my view only). An irony on the other side is that those digging their heels in against virtual for others could hurt their own cause. As many have reflected expanding the virtual academy doesn’t happen easily. If we had been working on a plan B for risk averse parents, or in case things go south as they are for many schools now closing, there wohld has been much less change that the answer would be to simulcast. But I bet that’s what they’ll do. DCPS right now feels painted into a corner. They, backed by parents willing to call pandemic cautious people names “anxious” and “fear mongering” “afraid of their own shadow” were emboldened into tripling down on a poor choice. It does seem to be the Bowser administrations way (and I voted for her and want to support her, but that’s over..).

I do want to say that if there is a shift to virtual, I will push hard as someone who wants virtual for a system that wont add more undue harm to those who want IPL.

I just would so appreciate the same consideration.

No. You don't get the "same consideration" after 1.5 years of closed schools. Now is the time to pour all resources into reopening schools. Parents who are risk averse can ALWAYS homeschool - which does not take much more resources than virtual.

You are so angry, and you don’t have the faintest idea of how involved homeschooling is. It’s not about the same as virtual but you either know that and don’t mind being absurd or you’re, well, I won’t meet you where you are with your anger. It’s not helping anything. I’m not your enemy. I want what’s best for my kids but don’t want to limit what you can do for yours. You aren’t the same. You don’t want me to have the ability to keep my not medically fragile 8 year old in virtual for the sake of my medically fragile 10 year old. One of my kids is exempt from IPL and one would be forced to go. There’s nothing ethical about your position. What if my healthy kid brings something home to my immunocompromised kid? What outcome for MY child are YOU comfortable with?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I do logistics (in a different field) for logistics, and I am not worried that the virtual option will take resources away from IPL, because it's not happening at this point.

Even if Bowser/Ferebee came out today and said yes to a virtual option, it would take at least a few months to put it together. But first, they would want to have a committee explore the options for expansion of virtual learning to see if it's even feasible.

It ain't getting done this calendar year. And there's even less of a reason to try to institute it for terms 3 & 4.

Sometimes I wonder what kind of jobs the people hold who think we can just flip a switch and turn on virtual.

well ... they actually did just flip a switch in March 2020! I'm against a virtual option, but I have no doubt they could flip a switch and do it. The real sticking point for DCPS is probably hiring teachers for it. Not sure where the "IPL option" folks think the teachers are going to magically come from?

Wait, You think what happened in March 2020 and last school year in terms of "flipping the switch" was a success? Have you spoken to many educators about the toll it has taken on them and the students and their families? Ask an educator what they think about the quality of the education they were able to offer virtually. Ask about the rates of depression in kids and the thousands of students who just never logged on. Ask about the number of Kindergarten/1st graders who have yet to touch a physical reading book.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:PG isn’t comparable in that they don’t have half of kids attending charters. Logistically a very different story.

That makes things EASIER for DCPS.

No, offering a virtual option at every school means charters as well, and no central option for the entirety of DC.

I also think charters (and the entire lottery system, for that matter) inhibit DCPS's ability to offer strong centralized leadership as PGPS has. There are so many competing interests in DCPS, it's very hard to unite school communities behind any big idea.

I also think the way DC public schooling is structured contributes to a culture of families not really caring about each other on a basic level. You compete in a lottery for spots, even IB spots at the PK level can be competitive. And then you have school themselves competing with one another for resources. It's a system that isolates families within it. And I think that's one reason you see some of the attitudes on display on this thread and in the whole IPL versus virtual debate. There is always a sense that someone is trying to take something away from you, whether it's a slot at a school or resources or access to a program. That may not be the intention of the system, but that's the effect.

So now parents who have the means to keep their kids virtual want to do so. And I get that, honestly. If I had a way of keeping my kid out of school this year I'd be seriously considering it. The problem is that I don't have that option -- for me, it's in person public school or just sheer misery (maybe job loss, maybe a mental breakdown, it's hard to say at this point). And when I see parents agitating for virtual options in a way that feels designed to undermine in person schooling, yeah, I get anxious. Because I need in person school. Like NEED it.

I wish DCPS could figure out a way to do this that gave everyone what the wanted and needed. But I'm afraid they won't (they never do) and I don't want to wind up with the short end of the stick this time. I can't afford it, frankly.

I’m one of the virtual option proponents and I agree with almost everything you say, but would offer that I and many others I know that are pushing for virtual do not want to remove the option for IPL. In fact I don’t even want simulcast or every school to have virtual as that works less well for everyone (my view only). An irony on the other side is that those digging their heels in against virtual for others could hurt their own cause. As many have reflected expanding the virtual academy doesn’t happen easily. If we had been working on a plan B for risk averse parents, or in case things go south as they are for many schools now closing, there wohld has been much less change that the answer would be to simulcast. But I bet that’s what they’ll do. DCPS right now feels painted into a corner. They, backed by parents willing to call pandemic cautious people names “anxious” and “fear mongering” “afraid of their own shadow” were emboldened into tripling down on a poor choice. It does seem to be the Bowser administrations way (and I voted for her and want to support her, but that’s over..).

I do want to say that if there is a shift to virtual, I will push hard as someone who wants virtual for a system that wont add more undue harm to those who want IPL.

I just would so appreciate the same consideration.

No. You don't get the "same consideration" after 1.5 years of closed schools. Now is the time to pour all resources into reopening schools. Parents who are risk averse can ALWAYS homeschool - which does not take much more resources than virtual.

You are so angry, and you don’t have the faintest idea of how involved homeschooling is. It’s not about the same as virtual but you either know that and don’t mind being absurd or you’re, well, I won’t meet you where you are with your anger. It’s not helping anything. I’m not your enemy. I want what’s best for my kids but don’t want to limit what you can do for yours. You aren’t the same. You don’t want me to have the ability to keep my not medically fragile 8 year old in virtual for the sake of my medically fragile 10 year old. One of my kids is exempt from IPL and one would be forced to go. There’s nothing ethical about your position. What if my healthy kid brings something home to my immunocompromised kid? What outcome for MY child are YOU comfortable with?

Many, many of us are intimately familiar with what homeschooling involves. You are free to buy a video curriculum and have the exact same experience as last year.

Fact: You’re the kind of person who wants to fight a worried parent of an immunocompromised kid with no options, because you think your kids in person needs are more important than my kids in person needs, you’re callous and tedious. I won’t convince you and don’t care to. You are soooo angry. Covid took your kids 2020 away, I didn’t.

DP. That's pretty condescending of you. My kid is severely dyslexic, with a IEP since first grade. I cannot teach him because he needs specialized, in-person help that I can't provide. So my question back to you, what do you say to the worried parent of a disabled child with no options? You are worried about your child's life? Well, I'm worried about mine. This isn't "socialization" or whatever phrase you use to demean IPL. This is my kid's life and ability to survive as well.

Allow me to repeat myself. I don’t want to take your in person away. I recognize it’s vital for your family. As virtual is for mine to keep my medically vulnerable kid safe. My healthy kid will catch and bring it home. I don’t want to lose my 10 year old child. Have a heart.

You are the heartless one. You have many, many other options. You can homeschool. You can enroll in one of the many online academies. You can unschool for a year (which is essentially what many kids did last year).

But no. That's not enough. You instead want to divert resources from the IPL population -- who are in general a much more vulnerable population who DO NOT have other options, unlike you -- because you don't really want to solve your problem, you just want to have a temper tantrum about it.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:PG isn’t comparable in that they don’t have half of kids attending charters. Logistically a very different story.

That makes things EASIER for DCPS.

No, offering a virtual option at every school means charters as well, and no central option for the entirety of DC.

I also think charters (and the entire lottery system, for that matter) inhibit DCPS's ability to offer strong centralized leadership as PGPS has. There are so many competing interests in DCPS, it's very hard to unite school communities behind any big idea.

I also think the way DC public schooling is structured contributes to a culture of families not really caring about each other on a basic level. You compete in a lottery for spots, even IB spots at the PK level can be competitive. And then you have school themselves competing with one another for resources. It's a system that isolates families within it. And I think that's one reason you see some of the attitudes on display on this thread and in the whole IPL versus virtual debate. There is always a sense that someone is trying to take something away from you, whether it's a slot at a school or resources or access to a program. That may not be the intention of the system, but that's the effect.

So now parents who have the means to keep their kids virtual want to do so. And I get that, honestly. If I had a way of keeping my kid out of school this year I'd be seriously considering it. The problem is that I don't have that option -- for me, it's in person public school or just sheer misery (maybe job loss, maybe a mental breakdown, it's hard to say at this point). And when I see parents agitating for virtual options in a way that feels designed to undermine in person schooling, yeah, I get anxious. Because I need in person school. Like NEED it.

I wish DCPS could figure out a way to do this that gave everyone what the wanted and needed. But I'm afraid they won't (they never do) and I don't want to wind up with the short end of the stick this time. I can't afford it, frankly.

I’m one of the virtual option proponents and I agree with almost everything you say, but would offer that I and many others I know that are pushing for virtual do not want to remove the option for IPL. In fact I don’t even want simulcast or every school to have virtual as that works less well for everyone (my view only). An irony on the other side is that those digging their heels in against virtual for others could hurt their own cause. As many have reflected expanding the virtual academy doesn’t happen easily. If we had been working on a plan B for risk averse parents, or in case things go south as they are for many schools now closing, there wohld has been much less change that the answer would be to simulcast. But I bet that’s what they’ll do. DCPS right now feels painted into a corner. They, backed by parents willing to call pandemic cautious people names “anxious” and “fear mongering” “afraid of their own shadow” were emboldened into tripling down on a poor choice. It does seem to be the Bowser administrations way (and I voted for her and want to support her, but that’s over..).

I do want to say that if there is a shift to virtual, I will push hard as someone who wants virtual for a system that wont add more undue harm to those who want IPL.

I just would so appreciate the same consideration.

No. You don't get the "same consideration" after 1.5 years of closed schools. Now is the time to pour all resources into reopening schools. Parents who are risk averse can ALWAYS homeschool - which does not take much more resources than virtual.

You are so angry, and you don’t have the faintest idea of how involved homeschooling is. It’s not about the same as virtual but you either know that and don’t mind being absurd or you’re, well, I won’t meet you where you are with your anger. It’s not helping anything. I’m not your enemy. I want what’s best for my kids but don’t want to limit what you can do for yours. You aren’t the same. You don’t want me to have the ability to keep my not medically fragile 8 year old in virtual for the sake of my medically fragile 10 year old. One of my kids is exempt from IPL and one would be forced to go. There’s nothing ethical about your position. What if my healthy kid brings something home to my immunocompromised kid? What outcome for MY child are YOU comfortable with?

Many, many of us are intimately familiar with what homeschooling involves. You are free to buy a video curriculum and have the exact same experience as last year.

Fact: You’re the kind of person who wants to fight a worried parent of an immunocompromised kid with no options, because you think your kids in person needs are more important than my kids in person needs, you’re callous and tedious. I won’t convince you and don’t care to. You are soooo angry. Covid took your kids 2020 away, I didn’t.

DP. That's pretty condescending of you. My kid is severely dyslexic, with a IEP since first grade. I cannot teach him because he needs specialized, in-person help that I can't provide. So my question back to you, what do you say to the worried parent of a disabled child with no options? You are worried about your child's life? Well, I'm worried about mine. This isn't "socialization" or whatever phrase you use to demean IPL. This is my kid's life and ability to survive as well.

Allow me to repeat myself. I don’t want to take your in person away. I recognize it’s vital for your family. As virtual is for mine to keep my medically vulnerable kid safe. My healthy kid will catch and bring it home. I don’t want to lose my 10 year old child. Have a heart.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Look, I think it would be fine for you to have virtual for both of your kids. But don’t claim we have no idea what homeschooling means. I am a former education researcher who specialized in unschooling and homeschooling. What happened last year was essentially a combination of both. Depended on your school offerings

How many people unschool in the DMV?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Look, I'm receptive to the arguments surrounding siblings under 12 of medically fragile kids. There should be restrictions, though, that anyone using the virtual school show proof of vaccine for anyone else in the household that's eligible for the vaccine. Kids are most likely to contract covid via household members, so if the concern is lowering risk of covid, then families should have no problems with that.

Half of the kids who have died of Covid had no pre-existing health conditions.

Anonymous wrote:Look, I'm receptive to the arguments surrounding siblings under 12 of medically fragile kids. There should be restrictions, though, that anyone using the virtual school show proof of vaccine for anyone else in the household that's eligible for the vaccine. Kids are most likely to contract covid via household members, so if the concern is lowering risk of covid, then families should have no problems with that.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:PG isn’t comparable in that they don’t have half of kids attending charters. Logistically a very different story.

That makes things EASIER for DCPS.

No, offering a virtual option at every school means charters as well, and no central option for the entirety of DC.

I also think charters (and the entire lottery system, for that matter) inhibit DCPS's ability to offer strong centralized leadership as PGPS has. There are so many competing interests in DCPS, it's very hard to unite school communities behind any big idea.

I also think the way DC public schooling is structured contributes to a culture of families not really caring about each other on a basic level. You compete in a lottery for spots, even IB spots at the PK level can be competitive. And then you have school themselves competing with one another for resources. It's a system that isolates families within it. And I think that's one reason you see some of the attitudes on display on this thread and in the whole IPL versus virtual debate. There is always a sense that someone is trying to take something away from you, whether it's a slot at a school or resources or access to a program. That may not be the intention of the system, but that's the effect.

So now parents who have the means to keep their kids virtual want to do so. And I get that, honestly. If I had a way of keeping my kid out of school this year I'd be seriously considering it. The problem is that I don't have that option -- for me, it's in person public school or just sheer misery (maybe job loss, maybe a mental breakdown, it's hard to say at this point). And when I see parents agitating for virtual options in a way that feels designed to undermine in person schooling, yeah, I get anxious. Because I need in person school. Like NEED it.

I wish DCPS could figure out a way to do this that gave everyone what the wanted and needed. But I'm afraid they won't (they never do) and I don't want to wind up with the short end of the stick this time. I can't afford it, frankly.

I’m one of the virtual option proponents and I agree with almost everything you say, but would offer that I and many others I know that are pushing for virtual do not want to remove the option for IPL. In fact I don’t even want simulcast or every school to have virtual as that works less well for everyone (my view only). An irony on the other side is that those digging their heels in against virtual for others could hurt their own cause. As many have reflected expanding the virtual academy doesn’t happen easily. If we had been working on a plan B for risk averse parents, or in case things go south as they are for many schools now closing, there wohld has been much less change that the answer would be to simulcast. But I bet that’s what they’ll do. DCPS right now feels painted into a corner. They, backed by parents willing to call pandemic cautious people names “anxious” and “fear mongering” “afraid of their own shadow” were emboldened into tripling down on a poor choice. It does seem to be the Bowser administrations way (and I voted for her and want to support her, but that’s over..).

I do want to say that if there is a shift to virtual, I will push hard as someone who wants virtual for a system that wont add more undue harm to those who want IPL.

I just would so appreciate the same consideration.

No. You don't get the "same consideration" after 1.5 years of closed schools. Now is the time to pour all resources into reopening schools. Parents who are risk averse can ALWAYS homeschool - which does not take much more resources than virtual.

You are so angry, and you don’t have the faintest idea of how involved homeschooling is. It’s not about the same as virtual but you either know that and don’t mind being absurd or you’re, well, I won’t meet you where you are with your anger. It’s not helping anything. I’m not your enemy. I want what’s best for my kids but don’t want to limit what you can do for yours. You aren’t the same. You don’t want me to have the ability to keep my not medically fragile 8 year old in virtual for the sake of my medically fragile 10 year old. One of my kids is exempt from IPL and one would be forced to go. There’s nothing ethical about your position. What if my healthy kid brings something home to my immunocompromised kid? What outcome for MY child are YOU comfortable with?

Many, many of us are intimately familiar with what homeschooling involves. You are free to buy a video curriculum and have the exact same experience as last year.

Fact: You’re the kind of person who wants to fight a worried parent of an immunocompromised kid with no options, because you think your kids in person needs are more important than my kids in person needs, you’re callous and tedious. I won’t convince you and don’t care to. You are soooo angry. Covid took your kids 2020 away, I didn’t.

DP. That's pretty condescending of you. My kid is severely dyslexic, with a IEP since first grade. I cannot teach him because he needs specialized, in-person help that I can't provide. So my question back to you, what do you say to the worried parent of a disabled child with no options? You are worried about your child's life? Well, I'm worried about mine. This isn't "socialization" or whatever phrase you use to demean IPL. This is my kid's life and ability to survive as well.

Allow me to repeat myself. I don’t want to take your in person away. I recognize it’s vital for your family. As virtual is for mine to keep my medically vulnerable kid safe. My healthy kid will catch and bring it home. I don’t want to lose my 10 year old child. Have a heart.

Not sure why you don't enroll you children in a virtual charter.

NP. Because they are FULL!

They are not full. Enrollment and waitlists are being cleared daily.

Anonymous wrote:There seem to be a lot of people who can put together petitions and do a lot of advocacy work for a virtual option (whatever that means; I personally don't know any more since there are virtual options) but who claim they can't figure out homeschool.