Allegedly there are several options for the fall none of which include being back full time?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:All of this black and white thinking is ridiculous. It is not a choice between going back the way we used to or full-time distance learning for everyone. The reality is that it will be a hybrid of the two, and exactly what that looks like will vary across the country because there are different densities of people, different resources, and different community needs. As soon as Maryland put out the guidelines, it should have been apparent to anyone with an understanding of how a school actually functions that MCPS will have a hybrid model next year. These are the three most obvious reasons IMO:

1. If schools don't attempt to follow at least some of the guidelines and a child gets seriously sick and suffers permanent health problems or dies, there will be lawsuits.
2. There are going to be a significant number of parents who don't want to send their kids to school buildings. Because of this, the schools will have to offer some type of distance learning.
3. There are going to be a significant number of teachers who don't want to go in to school buildings. Because of this, the schools will need to offer distance learning. (And you can be flippant and say the teachers should just quit if they don't want to teach. Yes, yes they will. Mid-July is the date to retire, take leave of absence, or resign without prejudice. Then who will you have to teach your kids that you insisted had to be back in the schools?)

As a result of the above, two other challenges come to mind:
4. We know that DL isn't working for many kids, especially elementary, SPED, and ESOL. There is absolutely a priority to get as many kids back in the classroom as possible. The question right now is who and how?
5. In order to meet guidelines, the density of students in school buildings needs to be at least 50% of what it is normally. The question is, how to do this? Alternating days/weeks? Half-days with morning or afternoon shifts? Some students mostly in school and some students mostly at home?
5a. And yes, public schools do also function as daycare for the youngest students (under 8). Our economy as it is currently structured assumes that. How does this need to be adapted? Part of the day inside for learning, and then part of the day outside for play/daycare? Community co-ops for watching kids?

It's time for people to get over the idea that MCPS will start 2020 school year like it started 2019 in the fall. It is just not going to happen. Not because people are brainwashed, or hate your children, or don't want to teach. It's because as a society we know that we have to balance health, economic, and social concerns of all of the different people who live in our communities. Part of that balance will be a hybrid model for schools next year.

You are still not getting it. There is no reason to have any distance learning on the fall. There is no justification for it as there is no evidence that it has any real effect on the spread (schools that is). Nobody HAS to send their kids back to school-they can homeschool. There were people homeschooling before this and will be after this.

As far as teachers are concerned if they are that concerned then they need to find a new job. It's not like working with kids was risk free before. I work with kids and consistently get strep once a year because of it. It's never been a job without risk of getting sick. My kid got the flu from someone in his class last year and was very sick for 8 days. I didn't file a lawsuit about it.

Frankly "the I don't feel safe" argument from teachers just feels like a cop out at this point.

It doesn't matter what your opinion of teachers is. It matters what they will do. Many teachers are able to retire but keep teaching because they enjoy it. I know of two who already decided to retire this year when they were planning to retire next year. I know two other teachers who have personal health issues and/or family members with issues who won't go back into buildings. They are just waiting to see what MCPS plans are before deciding what they will do. A previous poster in this thread shared a similar story. Even with a hybrid plan, there may be teachers who decide it is less risk to resign and then go work as a nanny/teacher for someone willing to pay (head over to other parts of this forum to watch those discussions - pay might be better even.) I'm a career changer. I will change careers again if I think my job puts my health at risk. Plenty of teachers have choices. Contrary to popular views on DCUM, teachers are not servants to work as parents see fit. Teachers are professionals, and many have a lot more choices and flexibility about their careers than people assume. It's easy to claim, oh the system will just hire other teachers. Um, we already have a teacher shortage. If you manage to hire anyone, your going to be getting inexperienced people, possibly uncertified, who can act as babysitters, and you will lose the main benefit for going back into the buildings - properly education our kids.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Former HIV immunology researcher and current MCPS teacher here:

A couple of points:
Vaccines are not perfect. You hope for at least 70% effectiveness to release. For some age groups the vaccines may not be effective. We may need seasonal vaccines if the corona virus has new strains similar to flu. We are already seeing new strains in the wild.

I don't feel safe in a classroom with students. The reality is that students will challenge any guidelines we set up. Students are not very reliable at following social distancing or washing hands. Some can't keep their hands off each other. I am concerned about staff that are high risk and the family of students that are high risk.

I don't think 7-12th grades should return to school for these reasons. I think the younger grades should return and spread out in all the classrooms with the option for staff to opt out and teach remotely as hybrid model. I also think ESOL, 504, and IEP students should return. Basically all learning should be online but students in the classes have adult supervision and stay in class together all day. I have no idea how buses would work though. The students are all over each other in the lines and on the buses.

This is a sensible plan.

No, it is not. Parent of a HS student.

+1000 Parent of HS and MS students.

[Anonymous]

Study finds that nearly 40 percent of low-income kids are doing little to no actual learning during distance learning:

https://www.npr.org/sections/coronavirus-live-updates/2020/05/27/862705225/survey-shows-big-remote-learning-gaps-for-low-income-and-special-needs-children

SO what will MCPS do? MCPS's hand is going to be forced not by upper-class parents but by equity concerns like this. MCPS does not want to see the already-yawning achievement gap become untenable because distance learning simply doesn't work for such a huge chunk of students. These kids need to be in the school buildings. And opening only for at risk/low-income children? If it's so risky to have schools fully open, wouldn't this just compound the problem of the virus' prevalence in low-income communities? so the plan to close the achievement gap is to provide regular in-school instruction to children at risk while withholding it from others?

It seems there is no way around some level of risk, unless we want to shelter until we have a vaccine (a crazy proposition). It is outweighed by the tremendous benefits of full-time in person school.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:All of this black and white thinking is ridiculous. It is not a choice between going back the way we used to or full-time distance learning for everyone. The reality is that it will be a hybrid of the two, and exactly what that looks like will vary across the country because there are different densities of people, different resources, and different community needs. As soon as Maryland put out the guidelines, it should have been apparent to anyone with an understanding of how a school actually functions that MCPS will have a hybrid model next year. These are the three most obvious reasons IMO:

1. If schools don't attempt to follow at least some of the guidelines and a child gets seriously sick and suffers permanent health problems or dies, there will be lawsuits.
2. There are going to be a significant number of parents who don't want to send their kids to school buildings. Because of this, the schools will have to offer some type of distance learning.
3. There are going to be a significant number of teachers who don't want to go in to school buildings. Because of this, the schools will need to offer distance learning. (And you can be flippant and say the teachers should just quit if they don't want to teach. Yes, yes they will. Mid-July is the date to retire, take leave of absence, or resign without prejudice. Then who will you have to teach your kids that you insisted had to be back in the schools?)

As a result of the above, two other challenges come to mind:
4. We know that DL isn't working for many kids, especially elementary, SPED, and ESOL. There is absolutely a priority to get as many kids back in the classroom as possible. The question right now is who and how?
5. In order to meet guidelines, the density of students in school buildings needs to be at least 50% of what it is normally. The question is, how to do this? Alternating days/weeks? Half-days with morning or afternoon shifts? Some students mostly in school and some students mostly at home?
5a. And yes, public schools do also function as daycare for the youngest students (under 8). Our economy as it is currently structured assumes that. How does this need to be adapted? Part of the day inside for learning, and then part of the day outside for play/daycare? Community co-ops for watching kids?

It's time for people to get over the idea that MCPS will start 2020 school year like it started 2019 in the fall. It is just not going to happen. Not because people are brainwashed, or hate your children, or don't want to teach. It's because as a society we know that we have to balance health, economic, and social concerns of all of the different people who live in our communities. Part of that balance will be a hybrid model for schools next year.

You are still not getting it. There is no reason to have any distance learning on the fall. There is no justification for it as there is no evidence that it has any real effect on the spread (schools that is). Nobody HAS to send their kids back to school-they can homeschool. There were people homeschooling before this and will be after this.

As far as teachers are concerned if they are that concerned then they need to find a new job. It's not like working with kids was risk free before. I work with kids and consistently get strep once a year because of it. It's never been a job without risk of getting sick. My kid got the flu from someone in his class last year and was very sick for 8 days. I didn't file a lawsuit about it.

Frankly "the I don't feel safe" argument from teachers just feels like a cop out at this point.

It doesn't matter what your opinion of teachers is. It matters what they will do. Many teachers are able to retire but keep teaching because they enjoy it. I know of two who already decided to retire this year when they were planning to retire next year. I know two other teachers who have personal health issues and/or family members with issues who won't go back into buildings. They are just waiting to see what MCPS plans are before deciding what they will do. A previous poster in this thread shared a similar story. Even with a hybrid plan, there may be teachers who decide it is less risk to resign and then go work as a nanny/teacher for someone willing to pay (head over to other parts of this forum to watch those discussions - pay might be better even.) I'm a career changer. I will change careers again if I think my job puts my health at risk. Plenty of teachers have choices. Contrary to popular views on DCUM, teachers are not servants to work as parents see fit. Teachers are professionals, and many have a lot more choices and flexibility about their careers than people assume. It's easy to claim, oh the system will just hire other teachers. Um, we already have a teacher shortage. If you manage to hire anyone, your going to be getting inexperienced people, possibly uncertified, who can act as babysitters, and you will lose the main benefit for going back into the buildings - properly education our kids.

There is no teacher shortage in moco. I know this because I have my teaching degree although i ended up changing careers. They have a shortage of support staff but people line up for jobs with moco public schools (the medical insurance is fantastic). And they also get ton of applicants from out of state. Sure, some might be new grads but sometimes those are the best teachers (full of energy, fresh with new ideas).

That's great- let them nanny. They probably will put themselves in just as much/greater risk doing that then teaching since it will be with younger kids who aren't school age. And people who have nanny's want their kids socialized as well so that means play dates, Gymboree type classes etc...

Working with kids ALWAYS posses a risk of getting sick more often. My point was of teachers are so afraid they really shouldn't be teaching at all-COVID or not.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

I’m a teacher and administration told us today that we may not be back in the buildings in September, October, or November and to be prepared. We all feel really anxious and overwhelmed. Remote learning is boring and exhausting and joyless. No one wants this to continue, but we also won’t go back without protocols in place to keep everyone safe. I see a lot of parents on here who seem angry about the fact that schools will not just go back “as normal”. If you want schools to open up you need to support these measures. If parents are largely unwilling to comply with safety precautions it just won’t work.

This.

How will we measure the cost of all of those kids who could have been inspired, kept a spark and desire to keep learning, but now won't because they are stuck with "remote learning" that in the best of circumstances (ie, functional family, good wifi, sufficient computers, etc) is boring and joyless? Not to mention all those kids who don't have the best of circumstances? Not to mention the drop-off in referrals for child abuse (because the teachers aren't there to see it), etc.

We need to go back to school in person. To the extent the school is able to put in place the safety measures, it should. But if the safety measures are not feasible that should not lead to no (or only half-time or quarter-time) in-person school. Fact: people are going to die of this disease. Most of them will be elderly. That is very sad. But it is even more sad to lose a generation of kids.

Agree 100%.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:All of this black and white thinking is ridiculous. It is not a choice between going back the way we used to or full-time distance learning for everyone. The reality is that it will be a hybrid of the two, and exactly what that looks like will vary across the country because there are different densities of people, different resources, and different community needs. As soon as Maryland put out the guidelines, it should have been apparent to anyone with an understanding of how a school actually functions that MCPS will have a hybrid model next year. These are the three most obvious reasons IMO:

1. If schools don't attempt to follow at least some of the guidelines and a child gets seriously sick and suffers permanent health problems or dies, there will be lawsuits.
2. There are going to be a significant number of parents who don't want to send their kids to school buildings. Because of this, the schools will have to offer some type of distance learning.
3. There are going to be a significant number of teachers who don't want to go in to school buildings. Because of this, the schools will need to offer distance learning. (And you can be flippant and say the teachers should just quit if they don't want to teach. Yes, yes they will. Mid-July is the date to retire, take leave of absence, or resign without prejudice. Then who will you have to teach your kids that you insisted had to be back in the schools?)

As a result of the above, two other challenges come to mind:
4. We know that DL isn't working for many kids, especially elementary, SPED, and ESOL. There is absolutely a priority to get as many kids back in the classroom as possible. The question right now is who and how?
5. In order to meet guidelines, the density of students in school buildings needs to be at least 50% of what it is normally. The question is, how to do this? Alternating days/weeks? Half-days with morning or afternoon shifts? Some students mostly in school and some students mostly at home?
5a. And yes, public schools do also function as daycare for the youngest students (under 8). Our economy as it is currently structured assumes that. How does this need to be adapted? Part of the day inside for learning, and then part of the day outside for play/daycare? Community co-ops for watching kids?

It's time for people to get over the idea that MCPS will start 2020 school year like it started 2019 in the fall. It is just not going to happen. Not because people are brainwashed, or hate your children, or don't want to teach. It's because as a society we know that we have to balance health, economic, and social concerns of all of the different people who live in our communities. Part of that balance will be a hybrid model for schools next year.

But 50% in person school to comply with social distance guidelines is not "balancing" things. It is giving strong priority to preventing the possibility of viral transmission, over the needs of the children.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:All of this black and white thinking is ridiculous. It is not a choice between going back the way we used to or full-time distance learning for everyone. The reality is that it will be a hybrid of the two, and exactly what that looks like will vary across the country because there are different densities of people, different resources, and different community needs. As soon as Maryland put out the guidelines, it should have been apparent to anyone with an understanding of how a school actually functions that MCPS will have a hybrid model next year. These are the three most obvious reasons IMO:

1. If schools don't attempt to follow at least some of the guidelines and a child gets seriously sick and suffers permanent health problems or dies, there will be lawsuits.
2. There are going to be a significant number of parents who don't want to send their kids to school buildings. Because of this, the schools will have to offer some type of distance learning.
3. There are going to be a significant number of teachers who don't want to go in to school buildings. Because of this, the schools will need to offer distance learning. (And you can be flippant and say the teachers should just quit if they don't want to teach. Yes, yes they will. Mid-July is the date to retire, take leave of absence, or resign without prejudice. Then who will you have to teach your kids that you insisted had to be back in the schools?)

As a result of the above, two other challenges come to mind:
4. We know that DL isn't working for many kids, especially elementary, SPED, and ESOL. There is absolutely a priority to get as many kids back in the classroom as possible. The question right now is who and how?
5. In order to meet guidelines, the density of students in school buildings needs to be at least 50% of what it is normally. The question is, how to do this? Alternating days/weeks? Half-days with morning or afternoon shifts? Some students mostly in school and some students mostly at home?
5a. And yes, public schools do also function as daycare for the youngest students (under 8). Our economy as it is currently structured assumes that. How does this need to be adapted? Part of the day inside for learning, and then part of the day outside for play/daycare? Community co-ops for watching kids?

It's time for people to get over the idea that MCPS will start 2020 school year like it started 2019 in the fall. It is just not going to happen. Not because people are brainwashed, or hate your children, or don't want to teach. It's because as a society we know that we have to balance health, economic, and social concerns of all of the different people who live in our communities. Part of that balance will be a hybrid model for schools next year.

Very true.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Study finds that nearly 40 percent of low-income kids are doing little to no actual learning during distance learning:

https://www.npr.org/sections/coronavirus-live-updates/2020/05/27/862705225/survey-shows-big-remote-learning-gaps-for-low-income-and-special-needs-children

SO what will MCPS do? MCPS's hand is going to be forced not by upper-class parents but by equity concerns like this. MCPS does not want to see the already-yawning achievement gap become untenable because distance learning simply doesn't work for such a huge chunk of students. These kids need to be in the school buildings. And opening only for at risk/low-income children? If it's so risky to have schools fully open, wouldn't this just compound the problem of the virus' prevalence in low-income communities? so the plan to close the achievement gap is to provide regular in-school instruction to children at risk while withholding it from others?

It seems there is no way around some level of risk, unless we want to shelter until we have a vaccine (a crazy proposition). It is outweighed by the tremendous benefits of full-time in person school.

Distance learning doesn't work for my solidly middle-class kids, either.

[Anonymous]

Hybrid model or distance learning, please.

There seems to be a lot of people, or perhaps a couple of prolific ones, who simply don’t understand science.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:All of this black and white thinking is ridiculous. It is not a choice between going back the way we used to or full-time distance learning for everyone. The reality is that it will be a hybrid of the two, and exactly what that looks like will vary across the country because there are different densities of people, different resources, and different community needs. As soon as Maryland put out the guidelines, it should have been apparent to anyone with an understanding of how a school actually functions that MCPS will have a hybrid model next year. These are the three most obvious reasons IMO:

1. If schools don't attempt to follow at least some of the guidelines and a child gets seriously sick and suffers permanent health problems or dies, there will be lawsuits.
2. There are going to be a significant number of parents who don't want to send their kids to school buildings. Because of this, the schools will have to offer some type of distance learning.
3. There are going to be a significant number of teachers who don't want to go in to school buildings. Because of this, the schools will need to offer distance learning. (And you can be flippant and say the teachers should just quit if they don't want to teach. Yes, yes they will. Mid-July is the date to retire, take leave of absence, or resign without prejudice. Then who will you have to teach your kids that you insisted had to be back in the schools?)

As a result of the above, two other challenges come to mind:
4. We know that DL isn't working for many kids, especially elementary, SPED, and ESOL. There is absolutely a priority to get as many kids back in the classroom as possible. The question right now is who and how?
5. In order to meet guidelines, the density of students in school buildings needs to be at least 50% of what it is normally. The question is, how to do this? Alternating days/weeks? Half-days with morning or afternoon shifts? Some students mostly in school and some students mostly at home?
5a. And yes, public schools do also function as daycare for the youngest students (under 8). Our economy as it is currently structured assumes that. How does this need to be adapted? Part of the day inside for learning, and then part of the day outside for play/daycare? Community co-ops for watching kids?

It's time for people to get over the idea that MCPS will start 2020 school year like it started 2019 in the fall. It is just not going to happen. Not because people are brainwashed, or hate your children, or don't want to teach. It's because as a society we know that we have to balance health, economic, and social concerns of all of the different people who live in our communities. Part of that balance will be a hybrid model for schools next year.

You are still not getting it. There is no reason to have any distance learning on the fall. There is no justification for it as there is no evidence that it has any real effect on the spread (schools that is). Nobody HAS to send their kids back to school-they can homeschool. There were people homeschooling before this and will be after this.

As far as teachers are concerned if they are that concerned then they need to find a new job. It's not like working with kids was risk free before. I work with kids and consistently get strep once a year because of it. It's never been a job without risk of getting sick. My kid got the flu from someone in his class last year and was very sick for 8 days. I didn't file a lawsuit about it.

Frankly "the I don't feel safe" argument from teachers just feels like a cop out at this point.

Um Covid can and does kill people. And not just elderly. Do you never look at the MoCo graphs? I work in healthcare.
Big difference

For the under 65 demographic without severe pre-existing conditions, the infection fatality rate of covid is not higher than the flu.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:All of this black and white thinking is ridiculous. It is not a choice between going back the way we used to or full-time distance learning for everyone. The reality is that it will be a hybrid of the two, and exactly what that looks like will vary across the country because there are different densities of people, different resources, and different community needs. As soon as Maryland put out the guidelines, it should have been apparent to anyone with an understanding of how a school actually functions that MCPS will have a hybrid model next year. These are the three most obvious reasons IMO:

1. If schools don't attempt to follow at least some of the guidelines and a child gets seriously sick and suffers permanent health problems or dies, there will be lawsuits.
2. There are going to be a significant number of parents who don't want to send their kids to school buildings. Because of this, the schools will have to offer some type of distance learning.
3. There are going to be a significant number of teachers who don't want to go in to school buildings. Because of this, the schools will need to offer distance learning. (And you can be flippant and say the teachers should just quit if they don't want to teach. Yes, yes they will. Mid-July is the date to retire, take leave of absence, or resign without prejudice. Then who will you have to teach your kids that you insisted had to be back in the schools?)

As a result of the above, two other challenges come to mind:
4. We know that DL isn't working for many kids, especially elementary, SPED, and ESOL. There is absolutely a priority to get as many kids back in the classroom as possible. The question right now is who and how?
5. In order to meet guidelines, the density of students in school buildings needs to be at least 50% of what it is normally. The question is, how to do this? Alternating days/weeks? Half-days with morning or afternoon shifts? Some students mostly in school and some students mostly at home?
5a. And yes, public schools do also function as daycare for the youngest students (under 8). Our economy as it is currently structured assumes that. How does this need to be adapted? Part of the day inside for learning, and then part of the day outside for play/daycare? Community co-ops for watching kids?

It's time for people to get over the idea that MCPS will start 2020 school year like it started 2019 in the fall. It is just not going to happen. Not because people are brainwashed, or hate your children, or don't want to teach. It's because as a society we know that we have to balance health, economic, and social concerns of all of the different people who live in our communities. Part of that balance will be a hybrid model for schools next year.

You are still not getting it. There is no reason to have any distance learning on the fall. There is no justification for it as there is no evidence that it has any real effect on the spread (schools that is). Nobody HAS to send their kids back to school-they can homeschool. There were people homeschooling before this and will be after this.

As far as teachers are concerned if they are that concerned then they need to find a new job. It's not like working with kids was risk free before. I work with kids and consistently get strep once a year because of it. It's never been a job without risk of getting sick. My kid got the flu from someone in his class last year and was very sick for 8 days. I didn't file a lawsuit about it.

Frankly "the I don't feel safe" argument from teachers just feels like a cop out at this point.

It doesn't matter what your opinion of teachers is. It matters what they will do. Many teachers are able to retire but keep teaching because they enjoy it. I know of two who already decided to retire this year when they were planning to retire next year. I know two other teachers who have personal health issues and/or family members with issues who won't go back into buildings. They are just waiting to see what MCPS plans are before deciding what they will do. A previous poster in this thread shared a similar story. Even with a hybrid plan, there may be teachers who decide it is less risk to resign and then go work as a nanny/teacher for someone willing to pay (head over to other parts of this forum to watch those discussions - pay might be better even.) I'm a career changer. I will change careers again if I think my job puts my health at risk. Plenty of teachers have choices. Contrary to popular views on DCUM, teachers are not servants to work as parents see fit. Teachers are professionals, and many have a lot more choices and flexibility about their careers than people assume. It's easy to claim, oh the system will just hire other teachers. Um, we already have a teacher shortage. If you manage to hire anyone, your going to be getting inexperienced people, possibly uncertified, who can act as babysitters, and you will lose the main benefit for going back into the buildings - properly education our kids.

There is no teacher shortage in moco. I know this because I have my teaching degree although i ended up changing careers. They have a shortage of support staff but people line up for jobs with moco public schools (the medical insurance is fantastic). And they also get ton of applicants from out of state. Sure, some might be new grads but sometimes those are the best teachers (full of energy, fresh with new ideas).

That's great- let them nanny. They probably will put themselves in just as much/greater risk doing that then teaching since it will be with younger kids who aren't school age. And people who have nanny's want their kids socialized as well so that means play dates, Gymboree type classes etc...

Working with kids ALWAYS posses a risk of getting sick more often. My point was of teachers are so afraid they really shouldn't be teaching at all-COVID or not.

There is a teacher shortage in MoCo. And MCPS imports 40% of it’s teachers compared to other states such as MA with similarly well-educated populations clustered around high COLA public school districts.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Study finds that nearly 40 percent of low-income kids are doing little to no actual learning during distance learning:

https://www.npr.org/sections/coronavirus-live-updates/2020/05/27/862705225/survey-shows-big-remote-learning-gaps-for-low-income-and-special-needs-children

SO what will MCPS do? MCPS's hand is going to be forced not by upper-class parents but by equity concerns like this. MCPS does not want to see the already-yawning achievement gap become untenable because distance learning simply doesn't work for such a huge chunk of students. These kids need to be in the school buildings. And opening only for at risk/low-income children? If it's so risky to have schools fully open, wouldn't this just compound the problem of the virus' prevalence in low-income communities? so the plan to close the achievement gap is to provide regular in-school instruction to children at risk while withholding it from others?

It seems there is no way around some level of risk, unless we want to shelter until we have a vaccine (a crazy proposition). It is outweighed by the tremendous benefits of full-time in person school.

Distance learning doesn't work for my solidly middle-class kids, either.

Mine neither I was just trying to say I don't think DL is going to happen

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Scientist here, with a background in virology. I see there's a lot of misinformation on this thread.

1. Caution is the name of the game in science and medicine.
SARS-Cov-2 is a novel virus that just jumped the species barrier, not a well-known virus that is long adapted to humans. Consequently, we are looking at a high standard of confirmation for any study that shows a portion of the population may not transmit viral particles easily. This is because airborne viruses usually don't discriminate in the transmission department. Why should this virus be different? While children seem to have fewer symptoms than adults, this does not mean, and has never meant, that they transmit less virus. Any study showing that children are not likely carriers of Covid-19 should be looked at suspiciously until we can replicate the study multiple times and confirm the finding. This has not yet happened.

2. Schools are accelerators of viral spread, because children with poor hygiene and lack of physical distancing will expose each other and expose household members and school staff, and their household members, and into the community, a portion of which is in higher-risk categories.

3. There are precious few schools where physical distancing is feasible without at least some remote learning. Most children are 25-30 to a class. Core spaces like cafeterias, gyms, media centers, music rooms, athletic changing rooms, are not designed for physical distancing. Buses pose a particular risk.

4. The great news is that vaccine production seems to be advancing ahead of schedule, and will be ready as early as the beginning of 2021. It's true vaccine specialists have cut corners, there's no denying it. But basic safeguards are not ignored. Clinical studies testing for SAFETY and EFFICACY are happening and will happen.

5. Just because protesters find it important to assemble in person and express their views, with or without elementary precautions against viral transmission, does not mean the pandemic isn't just as dangerous as it was before. We must all wear masks and physically distance as much as we can.

Wow! Early 2021! So our kids only need to lose 5-6 more months of valuable education???? Fantastic!

The vaccine isn't going to make a bit of difference. And I don't believe your a scientist for a second.

I don’t either because studies show schools are NOT accelerators of virus spread.

It doesn't matter whether the PP is a scientist or not. It doesn't take a scientist to write what she wrote, but more importantly, whether and how we open schools or not is not a purely scientific decision. It is a decision that should be based on a thorough analysis of costs and benefits, with a view to the long term. The "scientist" PP wants to have proof that kids do NOT spread the virus before opening schools. An equally valid position would be to demand proof that kids DO spread the virus, and that their spread DOES significantly contribute to community spread before keeping schools closed indefinitely. If you consider the harms of closed schools greater than the potential harms of a potentially slight increase in overall community spread (and all currently available evidence points to the impact being slight), schools should return to regular operations with reasonable precautions. There is plenty of evidence that closed schools have a negative long-term impact on kids' futures, and it is not for someone with a background in virology to make the call whether those harms can be neglected because of a potential but unproven impact on viral community spread. It was estimated (I think it was in The Lancet), that opening schools *may potentially* lead to a 2-4% increase in overall deaths. Whether those deaths (which will be concentrated among the elderly) are a greater harm than the harms of lost education is not a scientific question but question of bioethics. Simply deferring to the virologists (who will always argue for the policies that will most minimize viral transmission) on the much more complex dilemmas we are facing is a cop out on the part of decision makers.

Smart stuff.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:All of this black and white thinking is ridiculous. It is not a choice between going back the way we used to or full-time distance learning for everyone. The reality is that it will be a hybrid of the two, and exactly what that looks like will vary across the country because there are different densities of people, different resources, and different community needs. As soon as Maryland put out the guidelines, it should have been apparent to anyone with an understanding of how a school actually functions that MCPS will have a hybrid model next year. These are the three most obvious reasons IMO:

1. If schools don't attempt to follow at least some of the guidelines and a child gets seriously sick and suffers permanent health problems or dies, there will be lawsuits.
2. There are going to be a significant number of parents who don't want to send their kids to school buildings. Because of this, the schools will have to offer some type of distance learning.
3. There are going to be a significant number of teachers who don't want to go in to school buildings. Because of this, the schools will need to offer distance learning. (And you can be flippant and say the teachers should just quit if they don't want to teach. Yes, yes they will. Mid-July is the date to retire, take leave of absence, or resign without prejudice. Then who will you have to teach your kids that you insisted had to be back in the schools?)

As a result of the above, two other challenges come to mind:
4. We know that DL isn't working for many kids, especially elementary, SPED, and ESOL. There is absolutely a priority to get as many kids back in the classroom as possible. The question right now is who and how?
5. In order to meet guidelines, the density of students in school buildings needs to be at least 50% of what it is normally. The question is, how to do this? Alternating days/weeks? Half-days with morning or afternoon shifts? Some students mostly in school and some students mostly at home?
5a. And yes, public schools do also function as daycare for the youngest students (under 8). Our economy as it is currently structured assumes that. How does this need to be adapted? Part of the day inside for learning, and then part of the day outside for play/daycare? Community co-ops for watching kids?

It's time for people to get over the idea that MCPS will start 2020 school year like it started 2019 in the fall. It is just not going to happen. Not because people are brainwashed, or hate your children, or don't want to teach. It's because as a society we know that we have to balance health, economic, and social concerns of all of the different people who live in our communities. Part of that balance will be a hybrid model for schools next year.

Sort of smart. Hybrid models won't happen. People keep talking about accommodations, which cost $$$. Which MCPS doesn't have. This is political.

Logistics are paramount, not health and "safety" lol. There will be no new capital investments. No new buses or drivers. No new teachers. No new buildings. No janitors, ESOL teachers, specials teachers (if SD is supposed to be enforced in classes with kids blowing wind on instruments), or lunch ladies for basically day-long SD spreading lunchroom protocols.

The budget is locked in for this year, but it sure isn't for next year when we'll see 20% cuts. That is the real conversation, not how much money we don't have that can be spent this year on temporary and mostly ineffective protocols.

All or nothing. Half days or alternating days or weeks will never happen. The logistics are impossible to implement on this short notice. Forget quality and effectiveness of DL, just attempting the jumble of logistics will collapse the capacity and budget of schools, the patience of teachers and parents and students, significant learning, parents' personal finances and careers and sanity, and on and on.

If MCPS attempts a convoluted hybrid model with not a single proof-of-concept example to show us, or other cases to highlight where hybrids worked, or even an internal study showing feasibility, and it collapses, there will be a revolt. So it's a political decision. These "leaders" better know they're playing with fire.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:All of this black and white thinking is ridiculous. It is not a choice between going back the way we used to or full-time distance learning for everyone. The reality is that it will be a hybrid of the two, and exactly what that looks like will vary across the country because there are different densities of people, different resources, and different community needs. As soon as Maryland put out the guidelines, it should have been apparent to anyone with an understanding of how a school actually functions that MCPS will have a hybrid model next year. These are the three most obvious reasons IMO:

1. If schools don't attempt to follow at least some of the guidelines and a child gets seriously sick and suffers permanent health problems or dies, there will be lawsuits.
2. There are going to be a significant number of parents who don't want to send their kids to school buildings. Because of this, the schools will have to offer some type of distance learning.
3. There are going to be a significant number of teachers who don't want to go in to school buildings. Because of this, the schools will need to offer distance learning. (And you can be flippant and say the teachers should just quit if they don't want to teach. Yes, yes they will. Mid-July is the date to retire, take leave of absence, or resign without prejudice. Then who will you have to teach your kids that you insisted had to be back in the schools?)

As a result of the above, two other challenges come to mind:
4. We know that DL isn't working for many kids, especially elementary, SPED, and ESOL. There is absolutely a priority to get as many kids back in the classroom as possible. The question right now is who and how?
5. In order to meet guidelines, the density of students in school buildings needs to be at least 50% of what it is normally. The question is, how to do this? Alternating days/weeks? Half-days with morning or afternoon shifts? Some students mostly in school and some students mostly at home?
5a. And yes, public schools do also function as daycare for the youngest students (under 8). Our economy as it is currently structured assumes that. How does this need to be adapted? Part of the day inside for learning, and then part of the day outside for play/daycare? Community co-ops for watching kids?

It's time for people to get over the idea that MCPS will start 2020 school year like it started 2019 in the fall. It is just not going to happen. Not because people are brainwashed, or hate your children, or don't want to teach. It's because as a society we know that we have to balance health, economic, and social concerns of all of the different people who live in our communities. Part of that balance will be a hybrid model for schools next year.

But 50% in person school to comply with social distance guidelines is not "balancing" things. It is giving strong priority to preventing the possibility of viral transmission, over the needs of the children.

Yes it is. There are going to be infection control protocols in place. The most extreme would be to continue distance learning indefinitely. The least extreme would be “more soap” (which is a joke). The middle ground is reducing density, sanitizing, and eliminating high risk activities, such as indoor physical education/chorus/etc. We can not physically expand the schools and hire more staff-there is no time or money to double the capacity of our schools. Having kids in school half time is a reasonable and balanced solution. Your daycare needs are not paramount to public health.