Did you guys see the news that came out yesterday that NYC public schools are not required to offer any synchronous instruction to children in blended learning on their remote days? This came out LAST NIGHT. What a bait and switch. Many schools are doing three (or more!) in-person cohorts, so kids now will have no one to help or talk to them from school for 4/6 of their school days. And the staffing issue was something school-level leaders have been raising the alarm on since the chancellor announced this plan.
I'm so upset. I picked remote-only from the start because I knew it would be such a mess, but there are so many families desperate for in-person school and I'm so sad that they are being offered such a pathetic educational plan. Kids with special needs, kids learning English--they will be completely abandoned. So awful.
Oh, also, if a school doesn't have enough teacher in the building, it's also fine to just park them in front of a screen with a teacher teaching remotely... so 10 kids in a classroom in masks... watching a screen. Great.
https://twitter.com/Jill_Jorgensen/status/1306049862698442753?s=20
This was inevitable. The idea that schools could provide a whole separate set of teachers to service the blended students' remote learning, with no money and a hiring freeze until last week, was always a pipe dream. As you say though, it sucks that schools have been calling this out for weeks and the top level leaders have only just acknowledged it.
We're hybrid and now that this has been announced, I suspect the school will pull the synchronous remote time (which I was dreading anyway... the music and gym teachers trying to teach Math and ELA remotely to 60 students!) I'd rather DC have two days per week of their class teacher's full attention in person; it's the same amount of time in total that the full remote kids get, just in more concentrated doses.
We're in a privileged position though, and it is harder for kids who need more support. However, I'm hoping that by getting rid of the blanket requirement for 90 synchronous minutes for all kids (or whatever it is for other grades), schools can use the resources they have to target support to those vulnerable students. I'd much rather the music and gym teachers spend their days contacting those families and helping troubleshoot for the kids who are struggling, rather than doing busywork over Zoom to meet a quota.
Disgraceful. I'm sure we're all going to wind up remote soon enough anyway.
My BK charter was always going to teach the class through live zoom instruction whether blended or remote. So the classroom blended spots are really just childcare. They were prioritized for essential workers. Were your schools going to have one zoom teacher teaching to remote students and a second teacher instructing the blended kids in person? Or were the remote students watching pre-recorded QTS and doing work on their own?
The published DOE model was to have one teacher teaching fully remote students (live for a couple of hours per day, asynchronous the rest); one teacher teaching the cohort of hybrid students who are in the building (all day, every day, alternating groups of kids); and a third teacher on Zoom with the hybrid kids who are not in person that day. So fully remote kids would have one teacher, but hybrid kids would have two.
So yeah, that's what schools were "going" to do. But it was never actually going to happen in most schools because it requires about 50% more teachers, and schools were given 0% extra funds to hire them.
Just another example of Carranza and de B talking out of their asses and making promises that can't be delivered.
What are QTS?
@a nonymous I just posted on another thread that my school HAS enough teachers, but is doing live zoom classes with in-person and remote students at the same time. Such idiocy.
@Anonymous Is the teacher in the classroom with the live kids while zooming? Or is this one of the schools who has the teachers elsewhere and just a supervisor in the building?
I'd imagine trying to juggle focus between kids in the room and on Zoom would be tough.
We started weeks ago and now the parents who choose virtual think it sucks and want to switch back. Too late now. What a mess !
My dd's HS was planning this all along. Blended = 2 days in person, core subjects only. Remote instruction is 3 days a week (actually 2, because one day is just gym and advisory), all independent assignments to be turned in by the end of the day. I don't see how they could do otherwise with the resources they have. And I feel fortunate that they are offering this, because my other kid in middle school is fully remote, and is already bored out of her mind.
Well, just to provide a differing opinion, mine is in K with 50/50 blended and I honestly prefer this. I'd rather have him in-person half time with worksheets or whatever on the other days. Remote K is utterly ridiculous.
It's doable with small class sizes. but...
I disagree. Kids this age need attention from human beings. That's the mechanism by which they learn. I mean, PBS kids' shows are quite educational, but no one would support parking them in front of a tv for 6 hrs a day
@anonymous I can't tell if you're trying to say that remote online K is a good or bad thing for this reason, but at the staffing ratio that was previously advertized (one teacher with 60 kids on Zoom), the remote component of hybrid wasn't going to be far off PBS kids' shows anyway. Nobody is going to get individual attention in that model. The mics will be off and they will be watching the teacher talk.
Realistically, hybrid kids are going to get as much attention as fully remote kids, but it will all be concentrated in two days per week, instead of spread over the whole week.
Parents are certainly free to feel that they'd rather not deal with the hassle of supervising Zoom calls and dealing with technology on the "off" days.
Obviously full time attention, five days per week, would be ideal for everyone, but that's not the situation we're in this year.
I really don’t care what they do on remote days. We aren’t going to get anything out of it anyway for our 4 and 7 year olds. Will just be sending them to school on their days and nanny will take them to the park on home days.
That would make sense, but you do realize that elementary schools have been instructed to keep the pacing the same for in-person and online days? So cohorts A,B,C,D (whether at school, hybrid but at home, or fully remote) are covering the same material on any given day of the week. If your kid simply "takes off" on the remote days they will certainly fall behind as the in-person teacher won't be repeating lessons for the different cohorts. This is obviously a ludicrous plan and totally unrealistic...
@anonymous That's so dumb and I hope schools ignore it, especially now that hybrid doesn't have to be live remote instructions. My two sisters who are DOE teachers have been bitching about it since it was announced. Obviously some material is going to be better suited to live, in-class instruction and some is going to be better suited to independent study. The teachers should structure their material however they feel is in the best interests of students learning in the hybrid model. And the DOE should butt out and let teachers use their professional judgement to do that.
Same. Zoom is such a disaster for my 10 year old that I'd rather have him in "real" school 2 days/week and let him do some worksheets at his own pace on the home days. The less Zoom, the better IMO.
ITA
The M-F pacing thing is the dumbest idea I’ve heard yet. I had no idea this was how it would work until a few days ago. Who came up with this? And without live teaching on home days? Those day should be reinforcement days and honestly days for kids to get outside and be kids. Im really upset about this.
Hopefully schools just ignore it. It's ridiculous.
Schools do not need to have their blended kids to asynch only - but there is no guarantee anymore. If they have a plan, they stick with the plan they have.It is not a mandate - it is additional guidance for schools who have teacher shortages or who did not have "creative" solutions approved as an exemption by the DOE. Many HS are now doing all remote, with in person kids watching online so they can address the teacher shortages. Others are doing block schedules rather than trying to do all classes in same day. It really varies by school, how many teachers got accommodations, how many kids went remote, etc. And unfortunately there are also many school where they simply do not have enough staff for various reason. https://ny.chalkbeat.org/2020/9/16/21440856/online-only-instruction-nyc-schools
@Anonymous The bit that OR is upset about, and that I was saying they should ignore, is the pacing directive that says all students in a grade must be learning the same material on Monday, the same on Tuesday etc, regardless of whether they are in person or at home on those days. That's stupid, because it's a no brainer that the in-person days should be used for new/challenging concepts that need more teacher guidance, and the home days be for review/practice of more familiar material.
I don't mind the idea of those days being asynchronous. Better than having one in-person teacher and a different one for remote. My real confusion is why they aren't using the specials teachers for the remote teaching. For elementary, science, art, PE, etc should be the ones running remote days and then the kids can do homework and projects in between those meetings. In school time should be devoted to reading, writing and math.