Anonymous wrote:god the parents at lafayette make me so happy we aren't there and that i have the community we do at our school
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Does this apply for ALL students who want to come back? Or just a lucky few? my understanding is some schools (Stoddert) can only accomodate some students- not all who want in person can get it.
Thanks for any insight
Stoddert parent here. Yes, there are less teachers in the classroom than at other schools and hybrid was only introduced in second and fourth grades. Instead it was decided to offer one classroom per grade level of 11 students only instead of including more children with a hybrid system. In term four there will be a second classroom of hybrid added to each grade level. Not the worst reopening in DCPS -- and to their credit they resisted the ridiculous option of adding cares classrooms (their is only one - the minimum) -- but when compared to Key for example Stoddert has been much less open. I believe that Key parents are much more involved, and this is part of the reason. I also think that as another poster said principals at schools that are open have helpe to motivate their teachers to understand the importance of in-person learning.
Do you expect to see an improvement to this in the fall. thanks!
I believe that for five full days per week in the fall the advocacy needs to continue. DCPS needs also to commit to simulcast. If there are DL only classrooms it may throw off the spacing. DCPS needs to not offer the ADA exemptions for the fall. It should be informing teachers and staff as of now that these will not be offered.
Anonymous wrote: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?
Of course not.
E-mail the Principal. She probably has good reasons in making these decisions. Let her explain to you why she feels this is safe.
She is not reckless and wouldn’t do something stupid.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote: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.
Your opinion. Stay virtual. Don't ruin this for the rest of us.
This has been the most exhausting part of the reopening debate. So many parents don’t understand that schools don’t have more teachers magically appearing. Virtual learning is going to be worse as teachers are being asked to fill two roles at once. All of these loud parents pushing for IPL don’t realize that they are also resource hoarding teachers from the families that either A) don’t feel safe returning B) have to work and don’t have an aftercare provider to rely on so they can’t send their kids back.
It is DISGUSTING to hear the “don’t ruin it for the rest of us” crowd. This is exactly what that study was talking about. Who do you think the “them” is in this scenario?
What are you talking about? For the last 9 weeks of the year, kids who remain virtual will be paired with a class abs teacher who is also virtual. That IMPROVES things for them. This isn’t about resource hoarding, it’s about giving everyone- the kids and the teachers- the best experience they can have based on the family’s choice. It’s the opposite of what you are writing. Virtual and IPL teachers are now NOT expected to fill two roles at once. They go back to focusing on one group.
+1000
Lafayette hired a new teacher for K term 4 IPL. So now there are 9 or 10 K teachers - 5 or 6 in person and 4 virtual. Of the 15-30 K kids who will remain virtual, they will have 4 teachers. How is this resource hoarding? This means virtual class sizes of 4-8 kids! This is just one grade obviously but disproves resource hoarding.
Lafayette hired...you realize that most schools don’t have the option and almost district wide teachers are going to have to be a doing IPL and VL. It’s rare schools have the personnel to dedicate teachers to both. But again, this is the problem with this forums perspective. Lafayette being able to do something means that everywhere can is sily
“And the argument on aftercare is that there should be no school if there is no aftercare? This is bizarre. We are 2 parents working full time and it’s much more challenging to work when our child is home half day than when in school for a full school day.”
I’m speaking of those families who don’t have the option to WFH, typically the jobs that employ more disadvantaged families. They are unable to leave their job at 3 pm to pick up kids.
Empathy and perspective, not to be found on this thread.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote: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.
Your opinion. Stay virtual. Don't ruin this for the rest of us.
This has been the most exhausting part of the reopening debate. So many parents don’t understand that schools don’t have more teachers magically appearing. Virtual learning is going to be worse as teachers are being asked to fill two roles at once. All of these loud parents pushing for IPL don’t realize that they are also resource hoarding teachers from the families that either A) don’t feel safe returning B) have to work and don’t have an aftercare provider to rely on so they can’t send their kids back.
It is DISGUSTING to hear the “don’t ruin it for the rest of us” crowd. This is exactly what that study was talking about. Who do you think the “them” is in this scenario?
What are you talking about? For the last 9 weeks of the year, kids who remain virtual will be paired with a class abs teacher who is also virtual. That IMPROVES things for them. This isn’t about resource hoarding, it’s about giving everyone- the kids and the teachers- the best experience they can have based on the family’s choice. It’s the opposite of what you are writing. Virtual and IPL teachers are now NOT expected to fill two roles at once. They go back to focusing on one group.
+1000
Lafayette hired a new teacher for K term 4 IPL. So now there are 9 or 10 K teachers - 5 or 6 in person and 4 virtual. Of the 15-30 K kids who will remain virtual, they will have 4 teachers. How is this resource hoarding? This means virtual class sizes of 4-8 kids! This is just one grade obviously but disproves resource hoarding.
And the argument on aftercare is that there should be no school if there is no aftercare? This is bizarre. We are 2 parents working full time and it’s much more challenging to work when our child is home half day than when in school for a full school day.
Lafayette hired...you realize that most schools don’t have the option and almost district wide teachers are going to have to be a doing IPL and VL. It’s rare schools have the personnel to dedicate teachers to both. But again, this is the problem with this forums perspective. Lafayette being able to do something means that everywhere can is sily
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: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.
Fact check: IPL students are majority of color reflecting the demographics of DCPS, but demand is higher among the minority of whites in DCPS. I just think it is worth correcting, because I think it has been overemphasize that pocs don't want IPL and whites do. The issue has just become more politicized than it should be.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote: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.
Your opinion. Stay virtual. Don't ruin this for the rest of us.
This has been the most exhausting part of the reopening debate. So many parents don’t understand that schools don’t have more teachers magically appearing. Virtual learning is going to be worse as teachers are being asked to fill two roles at once. All of these loud parents pushing for IPL don’t realize that they are also resource hoarding teachers from the families that either A) don’t feel safe returning B) have to work and don’t have an aftercare provider to rely on so they can’t send their kids back.
It is DISGUSTING to hear the “don’t ruin it for the rest of us” crowd. This is exactly what that study was talking about. Who do you think the “them” is in this scenario?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote: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.
Your opinion. Stay virtual. Don't ruin this for the rest of us.
This has been the most exhausting part of the reopening debate. So many parents don’t understand that schools don’t have more teachers magically appearing. Virtual learning is going to be worse as teachers are being asked to fill two roles at once. All of these loud parents pushing for IPL don’t realize that they are also resource hoarding teachers from the families that either A) don’t feel safe returning B) have to work and don’t have an aftercare provider to rely on so they can’t send their kids back.
It is DISGUSTING to hear the “don’t ruin it for the rest of us” crowd. This is exactly what that study was talking about. Who do you think the “them” is in this scenario?
What are you talking about? For the last 9 weeks of the year, kids who remain virtual will be paired with a class abs teacher who is also virtual. That IMPROVES things for them. This isn’t about resource hoarding, it’s about giving everyone- the kids and the teachers- the best experience they can have based on the family’s choice. It’s the opposite of what you are writing. Virtual and IPL teachers are now NOT expected to fill two roles at once. They go back to focusing on one group.
+1000
Lafayette hired a new teacher for K term 4 IPL. So now there are 9 or 10 K teachers - 5 or 6 in person and 4 virtual. Of the 15-30 K kids who will remain virtual, they will have 4 teachers. How is this resource hoarding? This means virtual class sizes of 4-8 kids! This is just one grade obviously but disproves resource hoarding.
And the argument on aftercare is that there should be no school if there is no aftercare? This is bizarre. We are 2 parents working full time and it’s much more challenging to work when our child is home half day than when in school for a full school day.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Does this apply for ALL students who want to come back? Or just a lucky few? my understanding is some schools (Stoddert) can only accomodate some students- not all who want in person can get it.
Thanks for any insight
Stoddert parent here. Yes, there are less teachers in the classroom than at other schools and hybrid was only introduced in second and fourth grades. Instead it was decided to offer one classroom per grade level of 11 students only instead of including more children with a hybrid system. In term four there will be a second classroom of hybrid added to each grade level. Not the worst reopening in DCPS -- and to their credit they resisted the ridiculous option of adding cares classrooms (their is only one - the minimum) -- but when compared to Key for example Stoddert has been much less open. I believe that Key parents are much more involved, and this is part of the reason. I also think that as another poster said principals at schools that are open have helpe to motivate their teachers to understand the importance of in-person learning.
Do you expect to see an improvement to this in the fall. thanks!
I believe that for five full days per week in the fall the advocacy needs to continue. DCPS needs also to commit to simulcast. If there are DL only classrooms it may throw off the spacing. DCPS needs to not offer the ADA exemptions for the fall. It should be informing teachers and staff as of now that these will not be offered.
Heck no. I don’t support simulcast. As a self contained teacher doing exactly that it sucks! The child online just isn’t as engaged and it sucks having to try just because the parents don’t feel it’s safe...regardless if we haven’t had a single case...
It’s also so much extra work to create activities that will transfer to online AND in person.
And I bet you accommodations will be offered in the fall. I hope not though, DL shouldn’t be an option in the fall.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote: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.
Your opinion. Stay virtual. Don't ruin this for the rest of us.
This has been the most exhausting part of the reopening debate. So many parents don’t understand that schools don’t have more teachers magically appearing. Virtual learning is going to be worse as teachers are being asked to fill two roles at once. All of these loud parents pushing for IPL don’t realize that they are also resource hoarding teachers from the families that either A) don’t feel safe returning B) have to work and don’t have an aftercare provider to rely on so they can’t send their kids back.
It is DISGUSTING to hear the “don’t ruin it for the rest of us” crowd. This is exactly what that study was talking about. Who do you think the “them” is in this scenario?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Does this apply for ALL students who want to come back? Or just a lucky few? my understanding is some schools (Stoddert) can only accomodate some students- not all who want in person can get it.
Thanks for any insight
Stoddert parent here. Yes, there are less teachers in the classroom than at other schools and hybrid was only introduced in second and fourth grades. Instead it was decided to offer one classroom per grade level of 11 students only instead of including more children with a hybrid system. In term four there will be a second classroom of hybrid added to each grade level. Not the worst reopening in DCPS -- and to their credit they resisted the ridiculous option of adding cares classrooms (their is only one - the minimum) -- but when compared to Key for example Stoddert has been much less open. I believe that Key parents are much more involved, and this is part of the reason. I also think that as another poster said principals at schools that are open have helpe to motivate their teachers to understand the importance of in-person learning.
Do you expect to see an improvement to this in the fall. thanks!
I believe that for five full days per week in the fall the advocacy needs to continue. DCPS needs also to commit to simulcast. If there are DL only classrooms it may throw off the spacing. DCPS needs to not offer the ADA exemptions for the fall. It should be informing teachers and staff as of now that these will not be offered.
Heck no. I don’t support simulcast. As a self contained teacher doing exactly that it sucks! The child online just isn’t as engaged and it sucks having to try just because the parents don’t feel it’s safe...regardless if we haven’t had a single case...
It’s also so much extra work to create activities that will transfer to online AND in person.
And I bet you accommodations will be offered in the fall. I hope not though, DL shouldn’t be an option in the fall.
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.
If you insist and protest that your kid's teacher should not change it does. You did not indicate you are but virtual families who are resisting and/or trying to disrupt the path Lafayette is on are affecting everyone else.