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

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:This thread is predictably a mess with people having the same arguments they have in every other COVID thread.

But for those that want to discuss practical logistical possibilities, here's my question:

-- How can a model with increased social distancing work, unless they substantially increase the number of teachers? So, for instance, I've heard people propose having HS be distance learning, and then using the empty HS buildings to enable to ES kids to spread out more with fewer in each classroom. But then don't you need to double the number of ES teachers (assuming the HS teachers will be busy teaching online)?

FWIW, I'm a HS parent and I think for the most part HS students can do fine with virtual learning, if the curriculum is restructured to rely more on independent learning and less on in-class lectures. Science labs are the really hard part. Also, much of the arts instruction (band, theater) is really tough, although not impossible, remotely. Otherwise, most HS classess, like college classes, can be taught/learned remotely. I took several HS level classes remotely (independent study by mail) back in the 80's, when there was no internet at all.

So I've heard this one too. One person who has been on calls talking about ideas said that one idea floated around was to actually use the MS and HS teachers to cover ES classes. (I'm a HS teacher) Another teacher and I have discussed how that could work - one ES teacher with one class split in half over two rooms. ES teacher teaching in one room, other adult (teacher, para, staff, sub) supervising students in other room doing classwork. Then the teachers swap places. I've also thought that in ES younger grades, you could split a class in half and have half indoors with a teacher and half outdoors doing PE/art/music/play, and then swapping.

The schools already shift resources within buildings - small student/teacher ratios for high needs classes, high ratio for PE or advanced classes. I could see that thinking applying here. Low ratios for in-person, high ratios for DL.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
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.

Having kids in school half time is not a reasonable and balanced solution.

How did we get to the point where half of my posts on DCUM are variations on "kids need to go to school"? I never would have believed that this would be a controversial statement.

How did we get to that point? We developed a historic, global pandemic. We are not living in normal times right now.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
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.

Having kids in school half time is not a reasonable and balanced solution.

How did we get to the point where half of my posts on DCUM are variations on "kids need to go to school"? I never would have believed that this would be a controversial statement.

How did we get to that point? We developed a historic, global pandemic. We are not living in normal times right now.

Which part of "kids need to go to school" do you disagree with?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If they end up doing anything less than full time in person it's pretty much guaranteed that a huge percentage of rising kindergartners wont be attending school in the fall. A bunch of parents won't have them start until the following year.

Frankly Kindergarten is the one grade that actually should be half day even when it isn’t a pandemic.

This is true and 13:33 is also true.

An extra year to mature will benefit many 5 year olds. Especially in DCUMland where non-potty trained 4 year olds abound. Let red-shirting be the norm. And they can start 1st the following fall when things will look more like 2019 than 2020.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
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.

Having kids in school half time is not a reasonable and balanced solution.

How did we get to the point where half of my posts on DCUM are variations on "kids need to go to school"? I never would have believed that this would be a controversial statement.

How did we get to that point? We developed a historic, global pandemic. We are not living in normal times right now.

Which part of "kids need to go to school" do you disagree with?

DP. Kids need to be educated. That does not have to happen in a public school building for most children.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
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.

Having kids in school half time is not a reasonable and balanced solution.

How did we get to the point where half of my posts on DCUM are variations on "kids need to go to school"? I never would have believed that this would be a controversial statement.

How did we get to that point? We developed a historic, global pandemic. We are not living in normal times right now.

Which part of "kids need to go to school" do you disagree with?

DP. Kids need to be educated. That does not have to happen in a public school building for most children.

Actually it does have to happen in a school building for most children. The kids already missed a third of the school year, this year. They need to go back to school next fall.

[Anonymous]

They should do what some of the colleges are doing:

1. No mask, no class
2. All instruction is synchronous and asynchronous (it’s videotaped live)
3. De-density (That may mean 1/3 of the class goes each day while the other 2/3 of the class watches the class live or later on video). I don’t know. Not sure how this works in HS it MS, but it’s really just about organization and getting the moving pieces working together.

Yes, that means teachers would need to be in the building. Schools will have to come up with accommodations for teachers who have disabilities that make that impossible given the risk. Students with health risks or who are sick can do 100% online.

And we all pray that the vaccine is out soon and effective.

[Anonymous]

*de-densify*

Not sure this was a word before COVID-19 but whatever.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
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.

Having kids in school half time is not a reasonable and balanced solution.

How did we get to the point where half of my posts on DCUM are variations on "kids need to go to school"? I never would have believed that this would be a controversial statement.

How did we get to that point? We developed a historic, global pandemic. We are not living in normal times right now.

Which part of "kids need to go to school" do you disagree with?

DP. Kids need to be educated. That does not have to happen in a public school building for most children.

Actually it does have to happen in a school building for most children. The kids already missed a third of the school year, this year. They need to go back to school next fall.

No, it doesn’t have to be in a school building if MCPS gets it’s act together regarding DL. Many school systems around the country and the world were able to be effective, meaningful, and enjoyable while still addressing equity issues related to tech and family life. MCPS needs to bring in stakeholders to find out what DL needs to be. Because the novel coronavirus is just the first of many major disruptions we can anticipate over the next 5 years. Whether it’s due to extreme weather or yet another new disease, we will continue to face breaks in F2F instruction. I remember MCPS students missing three weeks of instruction one February. We could throw all COVID-related caution to the wind and still end up with hurricane, derecho, or snow closures in the upcoming Fall and Winter. No one knows what chaos we might see between Election Day in November and Inauguration Day on a January depending on how things pan out.

We need to have a viable alternative. Saying F2F or nothing is wishful thinking that ignores the reality of the world we now live in.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
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.

Having kids in school half time is not a reasonable and balanced solution.

How did we get to the point where half of my posts on DCUM are variations on "kids need to go to school"? I never would have believed that this would be a controversial statement.

How did we get to that point? We developed a historic, global pandemic. We are not living in normal times right now.

Which part of "kids need to go to school" do you disagree with?

DP. Kids need to be educated. That does not have to happen in a public school building for most children.

Actually it does have to happen in a school building for most children. The kids already missed a third of the school year, this year. They need to go back to school next fall.

This. And if you don’t want to, homeschool on your own time and dime. Kids need education and a full set of academics. It’s crazy that kids already lost 1/3 of the school year in MCPS. That’s a big deal. With the summer out, can’t imagine how much catch up will be needed in the fall. And yet we have people rallying for schools to be closed.

[Anonymous]

Kids are not vectors. Schools need to reopen.

[Anonymous]

Today I am at work. At 955 am I get a message on the class Dojo app that the school counselor wants to do a zoom session with the kids at 10am.......in 5 mins.....and I am at work......The zoom link to the meeting was sent to my kids email account ( 2nd grader) but they also need to access a link that I have in the app to do the zoom class.
Its a shit show

So when only 5 kids showed up they decided to do it next Friday instead.
We are 4 months in and this is what we are getting.
I am not doing this in September.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

No, it doesn’t have to be in a school building if MCPS gets it’s act together regarding DL. Many school systems around the country and the world were able to be effective, meaningful, and enjoyable while still addressing equity issues related to tech and family life. MCPS needs to bring in stakeholders to find out what DL needs to be. Because the novel coronavirus is just the first of many major disruptions we can anticipate over the next 5 years. Whether it’s due to extreme weather or yet another new disease, we will continue to face breaks in F2F instruction. I remember MCPS students missing three weeks of instruction one February. We could throw all COVID-related caution to the wind and still end up with hurricane, derecho, or snow closures in the upcoming Fall and Winter. No one knows what chaos we might see between Election Day in November and Inauguration Day on a January depending on how things pan out.

We need to have a viable alternative. Saying F2F or nothing is wishful thinking that ignores the reality of the world we now live in.

Yes, it does have to be in a school building. Kids need to go to school. MCPS can offer a distance learning alternative for kids who can't go to school for health reasons.

[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.

Many experienced teachers are actually bad at teaching as well as bad as babysitters.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Kids are not vectors. Schools need to reopen.

If restaurants and churches and gyms can open, school can open full time. I can't even believe there is so much drama about this.