I’m getting nervous about school because of delta

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Concurrent sucks. Let’s not do that.

But what do we do about quarantining for COVID and COVID-like illnesses (AKA colds). How do we keep kids from falling behind when they catch a cold?

Or do we just ignore symptoms and send “sick” kids?

The thing is, pre Covid, kids just came back to school and worked with teachers to get caught up. I kind of feel like we need to stick with that rather than keep this “if you need concurrent for a few days you can have it” thing. Because it won’t just be for Covid. It’ll be when families go on vacation and want their kids to log in. It’ll be when kids just feel like staying home.

If one of my unvaccinated high schoolers is out with covid, they can catch up on their own when they come back. If they're smarter than the CDC, AMA, AAP, etc., they don't need to learn anything from me.

Are you going to be that callous if one of your fully vaccinated students is out with covid?

Not PP, but probably not - they probably got it from someone unvaxxed.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:In fact I do want them to give up quarantining if the kids were masked. It’s disruptive.

I think it’s annoying that they haven’t said what they plan to do yet.

I expect they can foresee how self-evident the need for concurrent availability is going to be in 4 weeks' time and they just don't need to deal with the crazy denialism du jour.

The teachers’ organizations and principal groups were very much against concurrent instruction. I don’t expect that will wane if it looks like it’s coming back.

Uh-huh, yeah, sure, then, they'll probably get what they think is best, absolutely, uh-huh.

Isn't it the DCUM consensus that the teacher groups have a lot of clout with the current SB?

Concurrent instruction is not going to be decided by who wins the political power struggle. This will have very little to do with clout, and everything to do with the public health situation. It looks like by the time school starts, the situation might be bad enough to require flexibility with concurrent instruction.

I’m doubtful. We’re still in pretty good shape and I predict it will level off before it gets to that point in our area. Kids back in school and a reduction of summer travel will help.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So, 11 and under at school, all must wear masks. I get it, it makes sense. I would say, teachers should also wear masks. Now, 12 and older…. Masks, no masks? Vaccinated students and teachers, no mask I assume. I have this scenario in my head… 10 kids in a HS class are not vaccinated. They are expected to wear masks, but teachers have their hands full, and cannot make sure all un-vaxxed kids keep their mask on, because-TEACHING! Now, one un-vaxxed kid gets covid and spreads it to other unvaxxed kids in class. Will parents/admin blame the teacher for not enforcing masking of unvaxxed kids? Who is at fault? Parents for not vaccinating their kids? Should the high schools/middle schools have parents sign waivers that say they will not blame school/teacher/classmate if their unvaxxed kid gets covid now that vaccine is readily available? Just a thought!

It’s not that hard. Unvaxxed kids could have a designation next to their name in SIS, similar to a medical flag. That lets the teacher know this kid needs to be wearing a mask, and reminds them every day at attendance (in every single class). Teens know what to do. They can wear their mask or face consequences like suspension for reckless behavior.

What is theoretically possible WITH A MANDATE that families disclose proof of vaccination status has no bearing on the reality which is there is no mandate so we cannot require it. A SIS designation is simple to do but there is as of right now no legal mechanism that allows schools to demand families provide this.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So, 11 and under at school, all must wear masks. I get it, it makes sense. I would say, teachers should also wear masks. Now, 12 and older…. Masks, no masks? Vaccinated students and teachers, no mask I assume. I have this scenario in my head… 10 kids in a HS class are not vaccinated. They are expected to wear masks, but teachers have their hands full, and cannot make sure all un-vaxxed kids keep their mask on, because-TEACHING! Now, one un-vaxxed kid gets covid and spreads it to other unvaxxed kids in class. Will parents/admin blame the teacher for not enforcing masking of unvaxxed kids? Who is at fault? Parents for not vaccinating their kids? Should the high schools/middle schools have parents sign waivers that say they will not blame school/teacher/classmate if their unvaxxed kid gets covid now that vaccine is readily available? Just a thought!

It’s not that hard. Unvaxxed kids could have a designation next to their name in SIS, similar to a medical flag. That lets the teacher know this kid needs to be wearing a mask, and reminds them every day at attendance (in every single class). Teens know what to do. They can wear their mask or face consequences like suspension for reckless behavior.

Yes, in a perfect world, where all high schoolers follow rules, that would work. I taught middle school last year, and kids did not keep their masks on all the time. It was easy to tell them to keep them on, because they ALL had to wear them. When you only see your students every other day, for 1.5 hours, you cannot remember who need a mask, and who doesn’t. There is only so much multi-tasking a teacher can do. Checking SIS for attendance a the start of class would work, but I doubt teachers could keep a mental list of students who need masks and those who do not.

[Anonymous]

I mean somehow we are now supposed to catch kids up from 2 back to back disrupted school years, maybe teach concurrently for kids staying home sick, oh and police mask adherence student by student by cross referencing vax status against SIS. Come on.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Concurrent sucks. Let’s not do that.

But what do we do about quarantining for COVID and COVID-like illnesses (AKA colds). How do we keep kids from falling behind when they catch a cold?

Or do we just ignore symptoms and send “sick” kids?

The thing is, pre Covid, kids just came back to school and worked with teachers to get caught up. I kind of feel like we need to stick with that rather than keep this “if you need concurrent for a few days you can have it” thing. Because it won’t just be for Covid. It’ll be when families go on vacation and want their kids to log in. It’ll be when kids just feel like staying home.

If one of my unvaccinated high schoolers is out with covid, they can catch up on their own when they come back. If they're smarter than the CDC, AMA, AAP, etc., they don't need to learn anything from me.

Are you going to be that callous if one of your fully vaccinated students is out with covid?

Not at all. They'll get the help they need, especially since they're victims of the selfish, unvaccinated fools around them. And my fully vaccinated students won't be out at all or will be out for a short period of time so it should be easy to tell the difference and also much easier to get them caught up.

Anyway, it's very difficult to recover in my subject after being out for a couple of weeks, especially with six other classes to attend to. Students' grades take a huge hit unless they were very strong to begin with.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:In fact I do want them to give up quarantining if the kids were masked. It’s disruptive.

I think it’s annoying that they haven’t said what they plan to do yet.

I expect they can foresee how self-evident the need for concurrent availability is going to be in 4 weeks' time and they just don't need to deal with the crazy denialism du jour.

I really want to know whether vaccinated adults & kids have to quarantine or not.

No they do not.

Are they going to know who is vaccinated ?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:So, 11 and under at school, all must wear masks. I get it, it makes sense. I would say, teachers should also wear masks. Now, 12 and older…. Masks, no masks? Vaccinated students and teachers, no mask I assume. I have this scenario in my head… 10 kids in a HS class are not vaccinated. They are expected to wear masks, but teachers have their hands full, and cannot make sure all un-vaxxed kids keep their mask on, because-TEACHING! Now, one un-vaxxed kid gets covid and spreads it to other unvaxxed kids in class. Will parents/admin blame the teacher for not enforcing masking of unvaxxed kids? Who is at fault? Parents for not vaccinating their kids? Should the high schools/middle schools have parents sign waivers that say they will not blame school/teacher/classmate if their unvaxxed kid gets covid now that vaccine is readily available? Just a thought!

I think vaccinated teachers should not wear masks for clearer instructional purposes.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So, 11 and under at school, all must wear masks. I get it, it makes sense. I would say, teachers should also wear masks. Now, 12 and older…. Masks, no masks? Vaccinated students and teachers, no mask I assume. I have this scenario in my head… 10 kids in a HS class are not vaccinated. They are expected to wear masks, but teachers have their hands full, and cannot make sure all un-vaxxed kids keep their mask on, because-TEACHING! Now, one un-vaxxed kid gets covid and spreads it to other unvaxxed kids in class. Will parents/admin blame the teacher for not enforcing masking of unvaxxed kids? Who is at fault? Parents for not vaccinating their kids? Should the high schools/middle schools have parents sign waivers that say they will not blame school/teacher/classmate if their unvaxxed kid gets covid now that vaccine is readily available? Just a thought!

It’s not that hard. Unvaxxed kids could have a designation next to their name in SIS, similar to a medical flag. That lets the teacher know this kid needs to be wearing a mask, and reminds them every day at attendance (in every single class). Teens know what to do. They can wear their mask or face consequences like suspension for reckless behavior.

What is theoretically possible WITH A MANDATE that families disclose proof of vaccination status has no bearing on the reality which is there is no mandate so we cannot require it. A SIS designation is simple to do but there is as of right now no legal mechanism that allows schools to demand families provide this.

I agree - I don’t think FCPS is going to have this info.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:In fact I do want them to give up quarantining if the kids were masked. It’s disruptive.

I think it’s annoying that they haven’t said what they plan to do yet.

I expect they can foresee how self-evident the need for concurrent availability is going to be in 4 weeks' time and they just don't need to deal with the crazy denialism du jour.

The teachers’ organizations and principal groups were very much against concurrent instruction. I don’t expect that will wane if it looks like it’s coming back.

Uh-huh, yeah, sure, then, they'll probably get what they think is best, absolutely, uh-huh.

Isn't it the DCUM consensus that the teacher groups have a lot of clout with the current SB?

Concurrent instruction is not going to be decided by who wins the political power struggle. This will have very little to do with clout, and everything to do with the public health situation. It looks like by the time school starts, the situation might be bad enough to require flexibility with concurrent instruction.

I’m doubtful. We’re still in pretty good shape and I predict it will level off before it gets to that point in our area. Kids back in school and a reduction of summer travel will help.

You’re engaging in some real wishful thinking if you don’t think cases will rise more than they are now during the usual respiratory virus season of fall & winter.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:In fact I do want them to give up quarantining if the kids were masked. It’s disruptive.

I think it’s annoying that they haven’t said what they plan to do yet.

I expect they can foresee how self-evident the need for concurrent availability is going to be in 4 weeks' time and they just don't need to deal with the crazy denialism du jour.

The teachers’ organizations and principal groups were very much against concurrent instruction. I don’t expect that will wane if it looks like it’s coming back.

Uh-huh, yeah, sure, then, they'll probably get what they think is best, absolutely, uh-huh.

Isn't it the DCUM consensus that the teacher groups have a lot of clout with the current SB?

Concurrent instruction is not going to be decided by who wins the political power struggle. This will have very little to do with clout, and everything to do with the public health situation. It looks like by the time school starts, the situation might be bad enough to require flexibility with concurrent instruction.

I’m doubtful. We’re still in pretty good shape and I predict it will level off before it gets to that point in our area. Kids back in school and a reduction of summer travel will help.

You’re engaging in some real wishful thinking if you don’t think cases will rise more than they are now during the usual respiratory virus season of fall & winter.

Maybe. Let’s see what happens throughout September and October. Cases might rise, but even then the situation isn’t going to become “that bad”.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:In fact I do want them to give up quarantining if the kids were masked. It’s disruptive.

I think it’s annoying that they haven’t said what they plan to do yet.

I expect they can foresee how self-evident the need for concurrent availability is going to be in 4 weeks' time and they just don't need to deal with the crazy denialism du jour.

The teachers’ organizations and principal groups were very much against concurrent instruction. I don’t expect that will wane if it looks like it’s coming back.

Uh-huh, yeah, sure, then, they'll probably get what they think is best, absolutely, uh-huh.

Isn't it the DCUM consensus that the teacher groups have a lot of clout with the current SB?

Concurrent instruction is not going to be decided by who wins the political power struggle. This will have very little to do with clout, and everything to do with the public health situation. It looks like by the time school starts, the situation might be bad enough to require flexibility with concurrent instruction.

I’m doubtful. We’re still in pretty good shape and I predict it will level off before it gets to that point in our area. Kids back in school and a reduction of summer travel will help.

You’re engaging in some real wishful thinking if you don’t think cases will rise more than they are now during the usual respiratory virus season of fall & winter.

Maybe. Let’s see what happens throughout September and October. Cases might rise, but even then the situation isn’t going to become “that bad”.

It’s never “that bad” until it’s you or your family. Then all the sudden it’s bad.

[Anonymous]

I think it is time to ask ourselves, “What would Brian Boitano do?”

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Concurrent sucks. Let’s not do that.

But what do we do about quarantining for COVID and COVID-like illnesses (AKA colds). How do we keep kids from falling behind when they catch a cold?

Or do we just ignore symptoms and send “sick” kids?

The thing is, pre Covid, kids just came back to school and worked with teachers to get caught up. I kind of feel like we need to stick with that rather than keep this “if you need concurrent for a few days you can have it” thing. Because it won’t just be for Covid. It’ll be when families go on vacation and want their kids to log in. It’ll be when kids just feel like staying home.

If one of my unvaccinated high schoolers is out with covid, they can catch up on their own when they come back. If they're smarter than the CDC, AMA, AAP, etc., they don't need to learn anything from me.

Are you going to be that callous if one of your fully vaccinated students is out with covid?

Not at all. They'll get the help they need, especially since they're victims of the selfish, unvaccinated fools around them. And my fully vaccinated students won't be out at all or will be out for a short period of time so it should be easy to tell the difference and also much easier to get them caught up.

Anyway, it's very difficult to recover in my subject after being out for a couple of weeks, especially with six other classes to attend to. Students' grades take a huge hit unless they were very strong to begin with.

If only we could do away with this whole "my body, my choice" nonsense and strap the unwilling down for their injections.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:In fact I do want them to give up quarantining if the kids were masked. It’s disruptive.

I think it’s annoying that they haven’t said what they plan to do yet.

I expect they can foresee how self-evident the need for concurrent availability is going to be in 4 weeks' time and they just don't need to deal with the crazy denialism du jour.

The teachers’ organizations and principal groups were very much against concurrent instruction. I don’t expect that will wane if it looks like it’s coming back.

Uh-huh, yeah, sure, then, they'll probably get what they think is best, absolutely, uh-huh.

Isn't it the DCUM consensus that the teacher groups have a lot of clout with the current SB?

Concurrent instruction is not going to be decided by who wins the political power struggle. This will have very little to do with clout, and everything to do with the public health situation. It looks like by the time school starts, the situation might be bad enough to require flexibility with concurrent instruction.

I’m doubtful. We’re still in pretty good shape and I predict it will level off before it gets to that point in our area. Kids back in school and a reduction of summer travel will help.

You’re engaging in some real wishful thinking if you don’t think cases will rise more than they are now during the usual respiratory virus season of fall & winter.

Maybe. Let’s see what happens throughout September and October. Cases might rise, but even then the situation isn’t going to become “that bad”.

It’s never “that bad” until it’s you or your family. Then all the sudden it’s bad.

So what do you propose? Masks, distancing and perhaps no in person school until Covid is non-existent and nobody is coming down with it? It’s not going away.