UPDATE: The recent school closure and then the announcement that schools will reopen with the aim of phasing out hybrid makes it even clearer: Remote-only families deserve another opportunity (or more than one) to make decisions best for their children based on new information. It's absurd to hold families to decisions made in mid-November as the landscape was so rapidly changing. We all know this school year is unlike any other. Parents, guardians, teachers, administrators, staff and city leaders have to work together to make it work. However, the announcement that families could only opt into hybrid learning over during one period in November was counter to that spirit of collaboration, and to all the communications families had been basing decisions on. Families had been told there would be multiple periods to switch from remote-only to hybrid. This had helped families make balanced decisions — about what they are comfortable with for their family's health, what works for their child's particular learning style, and how their plan relates to the reality of covid infections. Forcing families to choose in November -- while rates were rising and on the eve of schools being shut down -- ran against the promises made and against plans families had made. It meant placing bets for the rest of the year based on fast-changing information -- with our kids' education at stake. And it meant asking all of us to put faith in a system that is showing no reason for us to believe it can maintain its commitments. What is being offered in terms of instruction, safety, care for our kids' development is so uneven school to school -- and, as the chancellor has shown, may keep changing. We all agree that remote schooling needs more attention and resources. But changing plans and rushing families doesn't solve that. We need to focus on resources for all students: More teachers, more support for technology, more staff that attends to social-emotional development, more nurses. Last-minute changes forcing rushed decisions isn't a good foundation for that work.

Thousands of students across America cannot afford college because unless you have a kid or are married, it goes off your parents income until you are 24 EVEN IF you can prove they do not financially support you. The message being sent is for young adults to have kids or get married and this IS WRONG. People should be able to get financial relief who support themselves and want an education.

Not only are we putting the safety and health of our students at risk, but we are also risking the health and safety of faculty, staff, and their families. In addition, the proposed 50/50 plan will create even more disruptions and confusion among the students, primarily our middle schoolers and high schoolers. It will also place extreme amounts of stress on the faculty and staff, who have adjusted and adapted countless lessons to a virtual-only setting, as they will need to undo and redo all of the planning already done. We ask that you please consider the physical and mental health of the students and faculty of your schools, as well as that of the families involved and that you let us gather more data before sending students back. Other schools in the area are electing to send students back; please do not give in to peer pressure. Maintain a virtual status quo and see what happens in those settings before we rush into decisions that we do not know the outcome. Addition 9/26/2020: We would like to add that the conditions have not changed since the vote in July. Of all of the counties in Virginia, Prince William County is second to Fairfax in the number of cases. In addition, we would be returning in November, just when the annual flu season is set to start. CDC experts suggest that Covid-19 cases could increase in November alongside flu cases. The combination of flu and Covid-19 cases could create a deadly combination, so we should be trying our best to limit exposure. https://www.washingtonpost.com/health/covid-flu-season-collide/2020/09/04/23254d68-eb98-11ea-99a1-71343d03bc29_story.html

There can be no true justice in America until there is actions coupled with the apologies for the North America slave trade.

We should not have a defeated President naming a Justice for life in the last few months of his term. McConnell blocked Obama’s Garland appointment in Obama’s last YEAR.

In February of 2016 you said “ The American people should have a voice in the selection of their new Supreme Court Justice.” We believe you should stuck to the same standard now

In the midst of a pandemic, Big Tech is trying to enrich itself and invade our children’s privacy through new and untested online proctoring services. By scanning our children’s faces, IDs, and even their bedrooms, these online proctoring companies promise to end cheating forever. The choice is clear: surveillance has no place in our children’s lives. The Department of Education must protect kids’ privacy by banning private online test proctoring companies from K-12 schools. Online proctoring companies do exactly what they advertise to do: they collect invasive amounts of sensitive, private information, use new and untested technology to determine a child’s integrity, and create a permanent record of their behavior in their servers. By fudging the line between security and privacy, these firms are turning classrooms into a privacy threat. My first interaction with an online proctoring service was when I tried to take an online exam this past spring quarter. Within minutes, it was clear to me that this software had no place in the classroom. First, it asked my name, and then for government ID, and then to scan my face and retinas. As if that wasn’t enough, a company I had never heard of asked me to photograph my room, and that’s when I knew that this isn’t security software -- it’s straight-up spyware. Students aren’t criminals, and we shouldn’t be treated as such. It’s obvious that these services are dangerous in a college setting, but imagine how much worse it would be if they penetrated K-12 schools. Children would be forced to share mountains of sensitive, personal information with no oversight as to how it will affect their futures, including: - Biometric data like facial images, retina scans, and fingerprints - Citizenship status - Gender identity and expression - Weight, health conditions, and mental and physical disabilities - Online browsing history, internet searches, and interactions This technology is invasive for students of all ages, but especially inappropriate for kids under 18. Parents and children will be at the mercy of shadowy firms to determine their academic integrity, generating profiles for every child using invasive amounts of private information. If enough students and parents fight back against this move towards mass surveillance of young children, we can hold these companies accountable and protect kids’ privacy. Tell Betsy DeVos and the Department of Education: no more mass surveillance of children. Ban private online test proctoring companies from K-12 schools.

Distance learning is hard enough, but for 9 million kids without reliable internet access, remote school is nearly impossible. AT&T, one of the largest internet providers in the U.S, had been offering low-cost, high-speed internet to families at $10/month - but the waiver expires September 30, just as the school year is ramping up.

Need strong leadership to effectively lead the Big 10 at a time when the present leadership is weak, inefficient and basically of no effect.

I believe the requested renaming would reflect well on the city in which my mother (Eleanor Strawbridge Mead Schlinger), I, and my two daughters (Eleanor’s granddaughters) were born and the school at which my grandfather (Rufus Mead) was principal when Mack Robinson and Jackie Robinson were students there.

In light of anti-blackness in this country and how other marginalized groups are currently oppressed, we cannot afford to stay silent on this matter.

The regulation change announced by ICE on July 6 is unnecessary, unfair, and dangerous for the students affected by it. It bars students from re-entering the US, or threatens with deportation those who already are here, if they are attending a university that is only offering online courses due to COVID-19. This restriction has multiple unacceptable aspects: 1. It is unnecessary. ICE's role is to protect the United States against people who wish to enter illegally or with malicious intent. Students with a valid student visa do NOT meet this definition. 2. It is impractical. As the impact of coronavirus changes rapidly in various states and counties, universities are likely to rapidly change their teaching mode, starting or stopping in-person teaching from time to time. The regulation would force students to stay away when the courses are all online, allow them to come back when the courses are in-person or hybrid, send them away again if there is a reversal, etc. 3. It is costly. Many of the affected foreign students do not have the financial means to pay for extra airplane tickets home during the times when the regulation would ban them from the U.S. 4. It is dangerous. Putting those students on long international flights during the pandemic is dangerous to their health. It could arguably cause the death of several of them. 5. It is unfair. Some of these students would be back home in hostile conditions, or in a place where Internet is non-existent or of poor quality, or in family lodgings that are inconvenient for distance learning. Therefore they would not be in a position to continue their studies. The U.S. has granted these students visas to study in this country. This contributes to the reputation of this country as the world leader in higher education and research. The regulation changed announced by ICE on July 6 defeats this purpose. It is onerous, unfair, impractical, and unnecessary. It couldn't be better written if the motivation was actually xenophobia rather than the purported goal of protecting the U.S., which it does not achieve. This regulation change must be rescinded.