Maryland Recovery Plan for Education has been posted

[Anonymous]

Any thoughts about the many people in countries where it has been routine, for quite a while now, to wear masks during infectious-disease season? Are they all sick?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Then you either do not call them Adult or you call them Millenials. The giggle per se is reserved for little babies and toddlers.
Anyone outside such age group either does not giggle or calls it something else.

Someone on DCUM is policing how people should laugh. That's a new one.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Then you either do not call them Adult or you call them Millenials. The giggle per se is reserved for little babies and toddlers.
Anyone outside such age group either does not giggle or calls it something else.

Someone on DCUM is policing how people should laugh. That's a new one.

New, but not really surprising.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Any thoughts about the many people in countries where it has been routine, for quite a while now, to wear masks during infectious-disease season? Are they all sick?

Just because something does no make you sick immediately does no mean it does no make you sick.

Some things do need time to develop. Lack of oxygen causes all kinds of problems. Do you want to argue that? You lost already.

Humans are NOT designed to inhale carbon dioxide as their intake air.


The breath out gas exhaled by a person is 4% to 5% by volume of carbon dioxide, about a 100 fold increase over the inhaled amount.


Because a facemask will restrict the flow of air, a facemask should NOT be used by people who already have difficulty breathing due to an existing medical condition, such as asthma or emphysema.

[Anonymous]

Recommendations in California:
Masks:

"Wearing a mask may actually be harmful to some people with heart or lung disease because it can make the lungs work harder to breathe."

Small children should not wear masks. California's Dept. of Public Health points out, "Children should not wear these masks – they do not fit properly and can impede breathing. If the air quality is poor enough that a child requires a mask, the child should remain indoors, in a safe place, and evacuation should be considered"


People indoors should not wear masks. (The air isn't as bad indoors, and the masks can restrict breathing and increase breathing carbon dioxide making you feel worse, not better).


"Risks of N95 respirator use outside of fire zones outweigh benefits: Most people will not contact their healthcare provider before using the N95 respirator; N95 use may lead to increased heart rate, respiratory rate, work of breathing, CO2 buildup inicro-ambient air, potentially posing risk to sensitive populations; "

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Schools here are overcrowded and this is the single biggest obstacle to safe reopening of schools.


The corridors are so packed when students switch classes in my kid’s high school that they have been designated one way (same for staircases). I saw them: it’s a massive river of bodies packed together. It’s suffocating even without a mask.

The cafeteria cannot hold all students, and students are encouraged to go out to eat.

Even with masks, even with sanitizer, this is a petri dish situation.


This is not going to work. I don’t have a solution.

Totally AGREE! PP.

The school hallways are so crowded that with the huge crowd of kids a once in the small space the air quality is horrible.. it is hot, stuffy and hunhealthy as is..

Enter masks.. the kids would be fainting left right and center.

[Anonymous]

Yes, all we need is masks to make it worse, have kids breathing their own CO2... sure, healthy as heck...

Please help me to understand the conundrum. So we are putting masks on kids to protect them from the virus but
we make them sick by having them to breath their own CO2 for hours on end? Not to mention the bacteria and other gems
that would quickly grow inside the mask worn for HOURS which they are not meant to be worn in the first palce. Masks ever since the beginning of times were as a temporary short time use measure NOT as a permanent fixture on a human face.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I did a video conference last week in a mask. There were 4 other locations, all with masked people. Everyone heard one another with no problems.

Teachers need to buck up and stop complaining about masks.

Did it last for 7 hours and you were the primary speaker? And even when it wasn’t your turn to speak did you constantly have to ask Bob to stop tapping his pencil, or Mary to focus on her work? Was Nancy constantly out of her seat so you had to ask her 5 times to return to her seat? Was Steve pointing out everyone else who was pulling down their masks to get some air so you had to constantly remind everyone in the conference about proper mask wearing protocol? Did Tom’s parents get a note from his doctor saying that he can’t wear a mask so all of the other participants complain that it’s not fair that they have to wear a mask but Tom doesn’t? Was Robyn obsessed with taking sips from her water bottle as a way to not have to have her mask covering her mouth, but she’s still “technically “ following the mask rule?

Did all of the participants in your video conference have impulse control, or were they 7 year olds who don’t control their impulses? Just curious..

PP, if you as a teacher are speaking as the primary speaker for 7 hours at a stretch, then you're not teaching in MCPS.

(Also, I'm giggling about the 7-year-olds who are named Bob, Mary, Nancy, Steve, Tom, and Robyn.)

I’m pretty sure the poster was referencing the poster before him/her who said they had a video conference wearing masks, presumably with all adults, and the teacher PP was pointing out the differences between adults and children. Hopefully the adults named Bob, Mary etc weren’t doing those things but children definitely do those things, so it’s a false equivalency.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Then you either do not call them Adult or you call them Millenials. The giggle per se is reserved for little babies and toddlers.
Anyone outside such age group either does not giggle or calls it something else.

Someone on DCUM is policing how people should laugh. That's a new one.

New, but not really surprising.

You are policing what people should do regarding their kids and you would police and enforce mask wearing on a growing kids
so prepare to be policed back.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:How will they have the staff to cover lunches in classrooms and enough teachers to cover smaller classes spread out using MS space?

It says that they are going to cut out all specials--PE, music, art, etc-- and special education and repurpose those teachers as classroom teachers.

Where does it say so?

[Anonymous]

It is interesting that people who post here about what kids and teachers should wear and how parents should comply
clearly not only does no have kids but also seems overly invested in inflicting damage in the kids health and create long lasting impacts.
why?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Its all just for show. These are the only two realistic scenarios for fall in a world of limited funds: (1) school is back in session as usual, with a few extra precautions and (2) school is totally online.

There is huge political impetus for scenario (1) .

If daycares are operating as normal (for non-essential workers), then there is no justification for keeping schools closed. There is no way we will get to fall and still have the federal government working from home (mostly because the federal government is pretending COVIDis over). There is no way the federal goverment can go back to work until daycares are open.

MY bet is on scenario 1 and this report is just to make the people who put it together feel like they have a contingency plan.

Plan C.
Canada style. Schools creates opportunity to do half and half. Those who can and want to stay home with kids learning from home can do so. Those who want and need to go back to school can do so.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It is interesting that people who post here about what kids and teachers should wear and how parents should comply
clearly not only does no have kids but also seems overly invested in inflicting damage in the kids health and create long lasting impacts.
why?

Agreed.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:No specific dates in this education recovery document, but the following article says schools may not resume in-person classes until January 2021.

https://www.eyeonannapolis.net/2020/05/governor-hogans-update-on-covid-19-response-go-boating-and-golfing

The Governor's office has Tweeted that this article is incorrect. There is no date tied to the recovery plan. January 2021 isn't in the plan.

This article is weirdly hostile and inaccurate. I don’t know the publication, so I don’t know if it’s typical of the tone. But I just couldn’t tell what they were actually pissy about.

It's a local Annapolis website. Typically right/libertarian leaning, but not super-crazily so. I use it as a good source to know that there is breaking news, but it's not unusual that they get things wrong.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Recommendations in California:
Masks:

"Wearing a mask may actually be harmful to some people with heart or lung disease because it can make the lungs work harder to breathe."

Small children should not wear masks. California's Dept. of Public Health points out, "Children should not wear these masks – they do not fit properly and can impede breathing. If the air quality is poor enough that a child requires a mask, the child should remain indoors, in a safe place, and evacuation should be considered"


People indoors should not wear masks. (The air isn't as bad indoors, and the masks can restrict breathing and increase breathing carbon dioxide making you feel worse, not better).


"Risks of N95 respirator use outside of fire zones outweigh benefits: Most people will not contact their healthcare provider before using the N95 respirator; N95 use may lead to increased heart rate, respiratory rate, work of breathing, CO2 buildup inicro-ambient air, potentially posing risk to sensitive populations; "

Love California but they take an awfully strong stance on public health issues--see their insane list of possible carcinogens.