My 2nd grader’s teacher intends to mask all year

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There is no clear evidence that masks impact children’s speech or social skills. It’s just something that gets repeated because anti-maskers need a justification.

False. There is PLENTIFUL research on the impact of masks on communication; and pre-existing research on the role of faces and learning social skills/emotions/language. Beyond that, masks are an invasive intervention. It's just not true that you can mandate any intervention as long as there is not "clear evidence" against it. (Or whatever evidentiary standard you're using; it's a moving goal post.) Likewise claim that "blind kids learn to speak just fine, masks are not a problem!" is false. It's well known that visually impaired kids need specialized instruction for acquiring language and social skills because of the missing nonverbal cues.

I'm not even going to post the research here because there's so much. Anyone who is interested can search on Google Scholar.

There are also millions of dead people from covid. So what's your point? Teachers should risk their lives and well being for your benefit?

DP: The only point being made by OP and people who understand her point of view is that she has a valid reason to get her child switched to one of the other available classrooms. The does not harm the teacher in any way, shape, or form. This teacher can keep masking as she needs to do, and the child can have an adult model of speech in a different classroom whose facial expressions are fully available to her.

What happens when the OP finds out that the masked teacher is actually the stronger teacher? Would she demand her child be moved back? Or is the lack of a mask simply more important than any other variable?

Why are you setting up straw man arguments about things that didn't happen? You just want to keep arguing for the sake of arguing when there is an obvious and easy solution to OP's concern?

It’s a valid question. If the OP is going to burden the administration and two teachers with a schedule change, then that action is simply stating that the mask is the hill to die on. It is *the* defining, important characteristic for the OP. Classroom environment, teaching methods, etc., are less important.

I mean MCEA themselves lobbied for removing the mask mandate. They know it is a problem. This is not our f&cling imaginations.

Removing a mandate simply means masks aren’t required. People can still opt to wear them. All this means is that MCEA supports choice, which includes the choice to wear one.

You keep believing that

Um… what else should I believe? Are you suggesting that MCEA is somehow anti-mask and doesn’t want teachers wearing them? Source?

. Have you ever considered looking at this issue outside of the pro-mask vs anti-mask binary so many posters here seem stuck on? That some of us can believe masks are sometimes necessary, and of course people should have the choice to wear them, but they have real downsides? I don't have the links, but I remember reading MCEA was talking about needing to end the mask mandate even during the omicron surge (of course they recommended waiting until the surge was over). I got the impression a lot of teachers were having a real hard time with them.

But acknowledging downsides can be done while also acknowledging benefits. Hence, teachers and students have choice. My whole argument is that people currently have choice. Above, you acknowledge that “people should have the choice to wear them.” Therefore, I’m not sure why you are disagreeing with me.

Ugh, I'm not going to rehash tis whole conversation for you. My point was that it's not invalid to be concerned about a teacher wearing a mask. They do impede communication. Folks (you?l) above seem to think that's not a valid reason to change classroom change. That's essentially saying any downsides are minimal, yet MCEA seemed to think they were significant enough to eliminate the mask mandate that we were being told was protecting the teachers from certain death.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There is no clear evidence that masks impact children’s speech or social skills. It’s just something that gets repeated because anti-maskers need a justification.

False. There is PLENTIFUL research on the impact of masks on communication; and pre-existing research on the role of faces and learning social skills/emotions/language. Beyond that, masks are an invasive intervention. It's just not true that you can mandate any intervention as long as there is not "clear evidence" against it. (Or whatever evidentiary standard you're using; it's a moving goal post.) Likewise claim that "blind kids learn to speak just fine, masks are not a problem!" is false. It's well known that visually impaired kids need specialized instruction for acquiring language and social skills because of the missing nonverbal cues.

I'm not even going to post the research here because there's so much. Anyone who is interested can search on Google Scholar.

There are also millions of dead people from covid. So what's your point? Teachers should risk their lives and well being for your benefit?

DP: The only point being made by OP and people who understand her point of view is that she has a valid reason to get her child switched to one of the other available classrooms. The does not harm the teacher in any way, shape, or form. This teacher can keep masking as she needs to do, and the child can have an adult model of speech in a different classroom whose facial expressions are fully available to her.

What happens when the OP finds out that the masked teacher is actually the stronger teacher? Would she demand her child be moved back? Or is the lack of a mask simply more important than any other variable?

Why are you setting up straw man arguments about things that didn't happen? You just want to keep arguing for the sake of arguing when there is an obvious and easy solution to OP's concern?

It’s a valid question. If the OP is going to burden the administration and two teachers with a schedule change, then that action is simply stating that the mask is the hill to die on. It is *the* defining, important characteristic for the OP. Classroom environment, teaching methods, etc., are less important.

I mean MCEA themselves lobbied for removing the mask mandate. They know it is a problem. This is not our f&cling imaginations.

Removing a mandate simply means masks aren’t required. People can still opt to wear them. All this means is that MCEA supports choice, which includes the choice to wear one.

You keep believing that

Um… what else should I believe? Are you suggesting that MCEA is somehow anti-mask and doesn’t want teachers wearing them? Source?

. Have you ever considered looking at this issue outside of the pro-mask vs anti-mask binary so many posters here seem stuck on? That some of us can believe masks are sometimes necessary, and of course people should have the choice to wear them, but they have real downsides? I don't have the links, but I remember reading MCEA was talking about needing to end the mask mandate even during the omicron surge (of course they recommended waiting until the surge was over). I got the impression a lot of teachers were having a real hard time with them.

But acknowledging downsides can be done while also acknowledging benefits. Hence, teachers and students have choice. My whole argument is that people currently have choice. Above, you acknowledge that “people should have the choice to wear them.” Therefore, I’m not sure why you are disagreeing with me.

Several posters here seem to be under the impression there are no downsides. That’s the problem. If you’re going to choose to mask in the classroom, you should be aware of and acknowledge the harms that it brings to your students.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There is no clear evidence that masks impact children’s speech or social skills. It’s just something that gets repeated because anti-maskers need a justification.

False. There is PLENTIFUL research on the impact of masks on communication; and pre-existing research on the role of faces and learning social skills/emotions/language. Beyond that, masks are an invasive intervention. It's just not true that you can mandate any intervention as long as there is not "clear evidence" against it. (Or whatever evidentiary standard you're using; it's a moving goal post.) Likewise claim that "blind kids learn to speak just fine, masks are not a problem!" is false. It's well known that visually impaired kids need specialized instruction for acquiring language and social skills because of the missing nonverbal cues.

I'm not even going to post the research here because there's so much. Anyone who is interested can search on Google Scholar.

There are also millions of dead people from covid. So what's your point? Teachers should risk their lives and well being for your benefit?

DP: The only point being made by OP and people who understand her point of view is that she has a valid reason to get her child switched to one of the other available classrooms. The does not harm the teacher in any way, shape, or form. This teacher can keep masking as she needs to do, and the child can have an adult model of speech in a different classroom whose facial expressions are fully available to her.

What happens when the OP finds out that the masked teacher is actually the stronger teacher? Would she demand her child be moved back? Or is the lack of a mask simply more important than any other variable?

Why are you setting up straw man arguments about things that didn't happen? You just want to keep arguing for the sake of arguing when there is an obvious and easy solution to OP's concern?

It’s a valid question. If the OP is going to burden the administration and two teachers with a schedule change, then that action is simply stating that the mask is the hill to die on. It is *the* defining, important characteristic for the OP. Classroom environment, teaching methods, etc., are less important.

I mean MCEA themselves lobbied for removing the mask mandate. They know it is a problem. This is not our f&cling imaginations.

Removing a mandate simply means masks aren’t required. People can still opt to wear them. All this means is that MCEA supports choice, which includes the choice to wear one.

You keep believing that

Um… what else should I believe? Are you suggesting that MCEA is somehow anti-mask and doesn’t want teachers wearing them? Source?

. Have you ever considered looking at this issue outside of the pro-mask vs anti-mask binary so many posters here seem stuck on? That some of us can believe masks are sometimes necessary, and of course people should have the choice to wear them, but they have real downsides? I don't have the links, but I remember reading MCEA was talking about needing to end the mask mandate even during the omicron surge (of course they recommended waiting until the surge was over). I got the impression a lot of teachers were having a real hard time with them.

But acknowledging downsides can be done while also acknowledging benefits. Hence, teachers and students have choice. My whole argument is that people currently have choice. Above, you acknowledge that “people should have the choice to wear them.” Therefore, I’m not sure why you are disagreeing with me.

Several posters here seem to be under the impression there are no downsides. That’s the problem. If you’re going to choose to mask in the classroom, you should be aware of and acknowledge the harms that it brings to your students.

DP.

I think it's always important to acknowledge this, but always as part of a binary. There are negatives to masking, and negatives to not masking. If we can acknowledge both each time we make the acknowledgement of one, I think that's fine and have no objection to doing so.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There is no clear evidence that masks impact children’s speech or social skills. It’s just something that gets repeated because anti-maskers need a justification.

False. There is PLENTIFUL research on the impact of masks on communication; and pre-existing research on the role of faces and learning social skills/emotions/language. Beyond that, masks are an invasive intervention. It's just not true that you can mandate any intervention as long as there is not "clear evidence" against it. (Or whatever evidentiary standard you're using; it's a moving goal post.) Likewise claim that "blind kids learn to speak just fine, masks are not a problem!" is false. It's well known that visually impaired kids need specialized instruction for acquiring language and social skills because of the missing nonverbal cues.

I'm not even going to post the research here because there's so much. Anyone who is interested can search on Google Scholar.

There are also millions of dead people from covid. So what's your point? Teachers should risk their lives and well being for your benefit?

DP: The only point being made by OP and people who understand her point of view is that she has a valid reason to get her child switched to one of the other available classrooms. The does not harm the teacher in any way, shape, or form. This teacher can keep masking as she needs to do, and the child can have an adult model of speech in a different classroom whose facial expressions are fully available to her.

What happens when the OP finds out that the masked teacher is actually the stronger teacher? Would she demand her child be moved back? Or is the lack of a mask simply more important than any other variable?

Why are you setting up straw man arguments about things that didn't happen? You just want to keep arguing for the sake of arguing when there is an obvious and easy solution to OP's concern?

It’s a valid question. If the OP is going to burden the administration and two teachers with a schedule change, then that action is simply stating that the mask is the hill to die on. It is *the* defining, important characteristic for the OP. Classroom environment, teaching methods, etc., are less important.

I mean MCEA themselves lobbied for removing the mask mandate. They know it is a problem. This is not our f&cling imaginations.

Removing a mandate simply means masks aren’t required. People can still opt to wear them. All this means is that MCEA supports choice, which includes the choice to wear one.

You keep believing that

Um… what else should I believe? Are you suggesting that MCEA is somehow anti-mask and doesn’t want teachers wearing them? Source?

. Have you ever considered looking at this issue outside of the pro-mask vs anti-mask binary so many posters here seem stuck on? That some of us can believe masks are sometimes necessary, and of course people should have the choice to wear them, but they have real downsides? I don't have the links, but I remember reading MCEA was talking about needing to end the mask mandate even during the omicron surge (of course they recommended waiting until the surge was over). I got the impression a lot of teachers were having a real hard time with them.

But acknowledging downsides can be done while also acknowledging benefits. Hence, teachers and students have choice. My whole argument is that people currently have choice. Above, you acknowledge that “people should have the choice to wear them.” Therefore, I’m not sure why you are disagreeing with me.

Several posters here seem to be under the impression there are no downsides. That’s the problem. If you’re going to choose to mask in the classroom, you should be aware of and acknowledge the harms that it brings to your students.

What harm? There is far greater harm in having an outbreak in a classroom from covid. Have you consider the harm to the student, their family and our community with each outbreak? You may be done with covid, but covid is not done with us.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There is no clear evidence that masks impact children’s speech or social skills. It’s just something that gets repeated because anti-maskers need a justification.

False. There is PLENTIFUL research on the impact of masks on communication; and pre-existing research on the role of faces and learning social skills/emotions/language. Beyond that, masks are an invasive intervention. It's just not true that you can mandate any intervention as long as there is not "clear evidence" against it. (Or whatever evidentiary standard you're using; it's a moving goal post.) Likewise claim that "blind kids learn to speak just fine, masks are not a problem!" is false. It's well known that visually impaired kids need specialized instruction for acquiring language and social skills because of the missing nonverbal cues.

I'm not even going to post the research here because there's so much. Anyone who is interested can search on Google Scholar.

There are also millions of dead people from covid. So what's your point? Teachers should risk their lives and well being for your benefit?

DP: The only point being made by OP and people who understand her point of view is that she has a valid reason to get her child switched to one of the other available classrooms. The does not harm the teacher in any way, shape, or form. This teacher can keep masking as she needs to do, and the child can have an adult model of speech in a different classroom whose facial expressions are fully available to her.

What happens when the OP finds out that the masked teacher is actually the stronger teacher? Would she demand her child be moved back? Or is the lack of a mask simply more important than any other variable?

Why are you setting up straw man arguments about things that didn't happen? You just want to keep arguing for the sake of arguing when there is an obvious and easy solution to OP's concern?

It’s a valid question. If the OP is going to burden the administration and two teachers with a schedule change, then that action is simply stating that the mask is the hill to die on. It is *the* defining, important characteristic for the OP. Classroom environment, teaching methods, etc., are less important.

I mean MCEA themselves lobbied for removing the mask mandate. They know it is a problem. This is not our f&cling imaginations.

Removing a mandate simply means masks aren’t required. People can still opt to wear them. All this means is that MCEA supports choice, which includes the choice to wear one.

You keep believing that

Um… what else should I believe? Are you suggesting that MCEA is somehow anti-mask and doesn’t want teachers wearing them? Source?

. Have you ever considered looking at this issue outside of the pro-mask vs anti-mask binary so many posters here seem stuck on? That some of us can believe masks are sometimes necessary, and of course people should have the choice to wear them, but they have real downsides? I don't have the links, but I remember reading MCEA was talking about needing to end the mask mandate even during the omicron surge (of course they recommended waiting until the surge was over). I got the impression a lot of teachers were having a real hard time with them.

But acknowledging downsides can be done while also acknowledging benefits. Hence, teachers and students have choice. My whole argument is that people currently have choice. Above, you acknowledge that “people should have the choice to wear them.” Therefore, I’m not sure why you are disagreeing with me.

Several posters here seem to be under the impression there are no downsides. That’s the problem. If you’re going to choose to mask in the classroom, you should be aware of and acknowledge the harms that it brings to your students.

DP.

I think it's always important to acknowledge this, but always as part of a binary. There are negatives to masking, and negatives to not masking. If we can acknowledge both each time we make the acknowledgement of one, I think that's fine and have no objection to doing so.

What?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There is no clear evidence that masks impact children’s speech or social skills. It’s just something that gets repeated because anti-maskers need a justification.

False. There is PLENTIFUL research on the impact of masks on communication; and pre-existing research on the role of faces and learning social skills/emotions/language. Beyond that, masks are an invasive intervention. It's just not true that you can mandate any intervention as long as there is not "clear evidence" against it. (Or whatever evidentiary standard you're using; it's a moving goal post.) Likewise claim that "blind kids learn to speak just fine, masks are not a problem!" is false. It's well known that visually impaired kids need specialized instruction for acquiring language and social skills because of the missing nonverbal cues.

I'm not even going to post the research here because there's so much. Anyone who is interested can search on Google Scholar.

There are also millions of dead people from covid. So what's your point? Teachers should risk their lives and well being for your benefit?

DP: The only point being made by OP and people who understand her point of view is that she has a valid reason to get her child switched to one of the other available classrooms. The does not harm the teacher in any way, shape, or form. This teacher can keep masking as she needs to do, and the child can have an adult model of speech in a different classroom whose facial expressions are fully available to her.

What happens when the OP finds out that the masked teacher is actually the stronger teacher? Would she demand her child be moved back? Or is the lack of a mask simply more important than any other variable?

Why are you setting up straw man arguments about things that didn't happen? You just want to keep arguing for the sake of arguing when there is an obvious and easy solution to OP's concern?

It’s a valid question. If the OP is going to burden the administration and two teachers with a schedule change, then that action is simply stating that the mask is the hill to die on. It is *the* defining, important characteristic for the OP. Classroom environment, teaching methods, etc., are less important.

I mean MCEA themselves lobbied for removing the mask mandate. They know it is a problem. This is not our f&cling imaginations.

Removing a mandate simply means masks aren’t required. People can still opt to wear them. All this means is that MCEA supports choice, which includes the choice to wear one.

You keep believing that

Um… what else should I believe? Are you suggesting that MCEA is somehow anti-mask and doesn’t want teachers wearing them? Source?

. Have you ever considered looking at this issue outside of the pro-mask vs anti-mask binary so many posters here seem stuck on? That some of us can believe masks are sometimes necessary, and of course people should have the choice to wear them, but they have real downsides? I don't have the links, but I remember reading MCEA was talking about needing to end the mask mandate even during the omicron surge (of course they recommended waiting until the surge was over). I got the impression a lot of teachers were having a real hard time with them.

But acknowledging downsides can be done while also acknowledging benefits. Hence, teachers and students have choice. My whole argument is that people currently have choice. Above, you acknowledge that “people should have the choice to wear them.” Therefore, I’m not sure why you are disagreeing with me.

Several posters here seem to be under the impression there are no downsides. That’s the problem. If you’re going to choose to mask in the classroom, you should be aware of and acknowledge the harms that it brings to your students.

What harm? There is far greater harm in having an outbreak in a classroom from covid. Have you consider the harm to the student, their family and our community with each outbreak? You may be done with covid, but covid is not done with us.

Go back to Twitter and play with your friends

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There is no clear evidence that masks impact children’s speech or social skills. It’s just something that gets repeated because anti-maskers need a justification.

False. There is PLENTIFUL research on the impact of masks on communication; and pre-existing research on the role of faces and learning social skills/emotions/language. Beyond that, masks are an invasive intervention. It's just not true that you can mandate any intervention as long as there is not "clear evidence" against it. (Or whatever evidentiary standard you're using; it's a moving goal post.) Likewise claim that "blind kids learn to speak just fine, masks are not a problem!" is false. It's well known that visually impaired kids need specialized instruction for acquiring language and social skills because of the missing nonverbal cues.

I'm not even going to post the research here because there's so much. Anyone who is interested can search on Google Scholar.

There are also millions of dead people from covid. So what's your point? Teachers should risk their lives and well being for your benefit?

DP: The only point being made by OP and people who understand her point of view is that she has a valid reason to get her child switched to one of the other available classrooms. The does not harm the teacher in any way, shape, or form. This teacher can keep masking as she needs to do, and the child can have an adult model of speech in a different classroom whose facial expressions are fully available to her.

What happens when the OP finds out that the masked teacher is actually the stronger teacher? Would she demand her child be moved back? Or is the lack of a mask simply more important than any other variable?

Why are you setting up straw man arguments about things that didn't happen? You just want to keep arguing for the sake of arguing when there is an obvious and easy solution to OP's concern?

It’s a valid question. If the OP is going to burden the administration and two teachers with a schedule change, then that action is simply stating that the mask is the hill to die on. It is *the* defining, important characteristic for the OP. Classroom environment, teaching methods, etc., are less important.

I mean MCEA themselves lobbied for removing the mask mandate. They know it is a problem. This is not our f&cling imaginations.

Removing a mandate simply means masks aren’t required. People can still opt to wear them. All this means is that MCEA supports choice, which includes the choice to wear one.

You keep believing that

Um… what else should I believe? Are you suggesting that MCEA is somehow anti-mask and doesn’t want teachers wearing them? Source?

. Have you ever considered looking at this issue outside of the pro-mask vs anti-mask binary so many posters here seem stuck on? That some of us can believe masks are sometimes necessary, and of course people should have the choice to wear them, but they have real downsides? I don't have the links, but I remember reading MCEA was talking about needing to end the mask mandate even during the omicron surge (of course they recommended waiting until the surge was over). I got the impression a lot of teachers were having a real hard time with them.

But acknowledging downsides can be done while also acknowledging benefits. Hence, teachers and students have choice. My whole argument is that people currently have choice. Above, you acknowledge that “people should have the choice to wear them.” Therefore, I’m not sure why you are disagreeing with me.

Several posters here seem to be under the impression there are no downsides. That’s the problem. If you’re going to choose to mask in the classroom, you should be aware of and acknowledge the harms that it brings to your students.

DP.

I think it's always important to acknowledge this, but always as part of a binary. There are negatives to masking, and negatives to not masking. If we can acknowledge both each time we make the acknowledgement of one, I think that's fine and have no objection to doing so.

What?

PP said several posters are "under the impression there are no downsides" and that if you are "going to choose to mask in the classroom, you should be aware of and acknowledge the harms that it brings ..."

Fair's fair. It goes both ways. If you are going to choose not to mask in the classroom, you should be aware of and acknowledge the harms that not masking brings, just as much as the reverse.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There is no clear evidence that masks impact children’s speech or social skills. It’s just something that gets repeated because anti-maskers need a justification.

False. There is PLENTIFUL research on the impact of masks on communication; and pre-existing research on the role of faces and learning social skills/emotions/language. Beyond that, masks are an invasive intervention. It's just not true that you can mandate any intervention as long as there is not "clear evidence" against it. (Or whatever evidentiary standard you're using; it's a moving goal post.) Likewise claim that "blind kids learn to speak just fine, masks are not a problem!" is false. It's well known that visually impaired kids need specialized instruction for acquiring language and social skills because of the missing nonverbal cues.

I'm not even going to post the research here because there's so much. Anyone who is interested can search on Google Scholar.

There are also millions of dead people from covid. So what's your point? Teachers should risk their lives and well being for your benefit?

DP: The only point being made by OP and people who understand her point of view is that she has a valid reason to get her child switched to one of the other available classrooms. The does not harm the teacher in any way, shape, or form. This teacher can keep masking as she needs to do, and the child can have an adult model of speech in a different classroom whose facial expressions are fully available to her.

What happens when the OP finds out that the masked teacher is actually the stronger teacher? Would she demand her child be moved back? Or is the lack of a mask simply more important than any other variable?

Why are you setting up straw man arguments about things that didn't happen? You just want to keep arguing for the sake of arguing when there is an obvious and easy solution to OP's concern?

It’s a valid question. If the OP is going to burden the administration and two teachers with a schedule change, then that action is simply stating that the mask is the hill to die on. It is *the* defining, important characteristic for the OP. Classroom environment, teaching methods, etc., are less important.

I mean MCEA themselves lobbied for removing the mask mandate. They know it is a problem. This is not our f&cling imaginations.

Removing a mandate simply means masks aren’t required. People can still opt to wear them. All this means is that MCEA supports choice, which includes the choice to wear one.

You keep believing that

Um… what else should I believe? Are you suggesting that MCEA is somehow anti-mask and doesn’t want teachers wearing them? Source?

. Have you ever considered looking at this issue outside of the pro-mask vs anti-mask binary so many posters here seem stuck on? That some of us can believe masks are sometimes necessary, and of course people should have the choice to wear them, but they have real downsides? I don't have the links, but I remember reading MCEA was talking about needing to end the mask mandate even during the omicron surge (of course they recommended waiting until the surge was over). I got the impression a lot of teachers were having a real hard time with them.

But acknowledging downsides can be done while also acknowledging benefits. Hence, teachers and students have choice. My whole argument is that people currently have choice. Above, you acknowledge that “people should have the choice to wear them.” Therefore, I’m not sure why you are disagreeing with me.

Ugh, I'm not going to rehash tis whole conversation for you. My point was that it's not invalid to be concerned about a teacher wearing a mask. They do impede communication. Folks (you?l) above seem to think that's not a valid reason to change classroom change. That's essentially saying any downsides are minimal, yet MCEA seemed to think they were significant enough to eliminate the mask mandate that we were being told was protecting the teachers from certain death.

When did MCEA support eliminating the mandate? You "remember reading it somewhere" and that's gospel truth now?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There is no clear evidence that masks impact children’s speech or social skills. It’s just something that gets repeated because anti-maskers need a justification.

False. There is PLENTIFUL research on the impact of masks on communication; and pre-existing research on the role of faces and learning social skills/emotions/language. Beyond that, masks are an invasive intervention. It's just not true that you can mandate any intervention as long as there is not "clear evidence" against it. (Or whatever evidentiary standard you're using; it's a moving goal post.) Likewise claim that "blind kids learn to speak just fine, masks are not a problem!" is false. It's well known that visually impaired kids need specialized instruction for acquiring language and social skills because of the missing nonverbal cues.

I'm not even going to post the research here because there's so much. Anyone who is interested can search on Google Scholar.

There are also millions of dead people from covid. So what's your point? Teachers should risk their lives and well being for your benefit?

DP: The only point being made by OP and people who understand her point of view is that she has a valid reason to get her child switched to one of the other available classrooms. The does not harm the teacher in any way, shape, or form. This teacher can keep masking as she needs to do, and the child can have an adult model of speech in a different classroom whose facial expressions are fully available to her.

What happens when the OP finds out that the masked teacher is actually the stronger teacher? Would she demand her child be moved back? Or is the lack of a mask simply more important than any other variable?

Why are you setting up straw man arguments about things that didn't happen? You just want to keep arguing for the sake of arguing when there is an obvious and easy solution to OP's concern?

It’s a valid question. If the OP is going to burden the administration and two teachers with a schedule change, then that action is simply stating that the mask is the hill to die on. It is *the* defining, important characteristic for the OP. Classroom environment, teaching methods, etc., are less important.

I mean MCEA themselves lobbied for removing the mask mandate. They know it is a problem. This is not our f&cling imaginations.

Removing a mandate simply means masks aren’t required. People can still opt to wear them. All this means is that MCEA supports choice, which includes the choice to wear one.

You keep believing that

Um… what else should I believe? Are you suggesting that MCEA is somehow anti-mask and doesn’t want teachers wearing them? Source?

. Have you ever considered looking at this issue outside of the pro-mask vs anti-mask binary so many posters here seem stuck on? That some of us can believe masks are sometimes necessary, and of course people should have the choice to wear them, but they have real downsides? I don't have the links, but I remember reading MCEA was talking about needing to end the mask mandate even during the omicron surge (of course they recommended waiting until the surge was over). I got the impression a lot of teachers were having a real hard time with them.

But acknowledging downsides can be done while also acknowledging benefits. Hence, teachers and students have choice. My whole argument is that people currently have choice. Above, you acknowledge that “people should have the choice to wear them.” Therefore, I’m not sure why you are disagreeing with me.

Several posters here seem to be under the impression there are no downsides. That’s the problem. If you’re going to choose to mask in the classroom, you should be aware of and acknowledge the harms that it brings to your students.

DP.

I think it's always important to acknowledge this, but always as part of a binary. There are negatives to masking, and negatives to not masking. If we can acknowledge both each time we make the acknowledgement of one, I think that's fine and have no objection to doing so.

What?

PP said several posters are "under the impression there are no downsides" and that if you are "going to choose to mask in the classroom, you should be aware of and acknowledge the harms that it brings ..."

Fair's fair. It goes both ways. If you are going to choose not to mask in the classroom, you should be aware of and acknowledge the harms that not masking brings, just as much as the reverse.

Okay?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There is no clear evidence that masks impact children’s speech or social skills. It’s just something that gets repeated because anti-maskers need a justification.

False. There is PLENTIFUL research on the impact of masks on communication; and pre-existing research on the role of faces and learning social skills/emotions/language. Beyond that, masks are an invasive intervention. It's just not true that you can mandate any intervention as long as there is not "clear evidence" against it. (Or whatever evidentiary standard you're using; it's a moving goal post.) Likewise claim that "blind kids learn to speak just fine, masks are not a problem!" is false. It's well known that visually impaired kids need specialized instruction for acquiring language and social skills because of the missing nonverbal cues.

I'm not even going to post the research here because there's so much. Anyone who is interested can search on Google Scholar.

There are also millions of dead people from covid. So what's your point? Teachers should risk their lives and well being for your benefit?

DP: The only point being made by OP and people who understand her point of view is that she has a valid reason to get her child switched to one of the other available classrooms. The does not harm the teacher in any way, shape, or form. This teacher can keep masking as she needs to do, and the child can have an adult model of speech in a different classroom whose facial expressions are fully available to her.

What happens when the OP finds out that the masked teacher is actually the stronger teacher? Would she demand her child be moved back? Or is the lack of a mask simply more important than any other variable?

Why are you setting up straw man arguments about things that didn't happen? You just want to keep arguing for the sake of arguing when there is an obvious and easy solution to OP's concern?

It’s a valid question. If the OP is going to burden the administration and two teachers with a schedule change, then that action is simply stating that the mask is the hill to die on. It is *the* defining, important characteristic for the OP. Classroom environment, teaching methods, etc., are less important.

I mean MCEA themselves lobbied for removing the mask mandate. They know it is a problem. This is not our f&cling imaginations.

Removing a mandate simply means masks aren’t required. People can still opt to wear them. All this means is that MCEA supports choice, which includes the choice to wear one.

You keep believing that

Um… what else should I believe? Are you suggesting that MCEA is somehow anti-mask and doesn’t want teachers wearing them? Source?

. Have you ever considered looking at this issue outside of the pro-mask vs anti-mask binary so many posters here seem stuck on? That some of us can believe masks are sometimes necessary, and of course people should have the choice to wear them, but they have real downsides? I don't have the links, but I remember reading MCEA was talking about needing to end the mask mandate even during the omicron surge (of course they recommended waiting until the surge was over). I got the impression a lot of teachers were having a real hard time with them.

But acknowledging downsides can be done while also acknowledging benefits. Hence, teachers and students have choice. My whole argument is that people currently have choice. Above, you acknowledge that “people should have the choice to wear them.” Therefore, I’m not sure why you are disagreeing with me.

Ugh, I'm not going to rehash tis whole conversation for you. My point was that it's not invalid to be concerned about a teacher wearing a mask. They do impede communication. Folks (you?l) above seem to think that's not a valid reason to change classroom change. That's essentially saying any downsides are minimal, yet MCEA seemed to think they were significant enough to eliminate the mask mandate that we were being told was protecting the teachers from certain death.

When did MCEA support eliminating the mandate? You "remember reading it somewhere" and that's gospel truth now?

If you don't believe that MCEA supported removing the mask mandate, Google it. As for the exact date when they first expressed it, I recall reading it around January of this year. If you doubt that, I don't care.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There is no clear evidence that masks impact children’s speech or social skills. It’s just something that gets repeated because anti-maskers need a justification.

False. There is PLENTIFUL research on the impact of masks on communication; and pre-existing research on the role of faces and learning social skills/emotions/language. Beyond that, masks are an invasive intervention. It's just not true that you can mandate any intervention as long as there is not "clear evidence" against it. (Or whatever evidentiary standard you're using; it's a moving goal post.) Likewise claim that "blind kids learn to speak just fine, masks are not a problem!" is false. It's well known that visually impaired kids need specialized instruction for acquiring language and social skills because of the missing nonverbal cues.

I'm not even going to post the research here because there's so much. Anyone who is interested can search on Google Scholar.

There are also millions of dead people from covid. So what's your point? Teachers should risk their lives and well being for your benefit?

DP: The only point being made by OP and people who understand her point of view is that she has a valid reason to get her child switched to one of the other available classrooms. The does not harm the teacher in any way, shape, or form. This teacher can keep masking as she needs to do, and the child can have an adult model of speech in a different classroom whose facial expressions are fully available to her.

What happens when the OP finds out that the masked teacher is actually the stronger teacher? Would she demand her child be moved back? Or is the lack of a mask simply more important than any other variable?

Why are you setting up straw man arguments about things that didn't happen? You just want to keep arguing for the sake of arguing when there is an obvious and easy solution to OP's concern?

It’s a valid question. If the OP is going to burden the administration and two teachers with a schedule change, then that action is simply stating that the mask is the hill to die on. It is *the* defining, important characteristic for the OP. Classroom environment, teaching methods, etc., are less important.

I mean MCEA themselves lobbied for removing the mask mandate. They know it is a problem. This is not our f&cling imaginations.

Removing a mandate simply means masks aren’t required. People can still opt to wear them. All this means is that MCEA supports choice, which includes the choice to wear one.

You keep believing that

Um… what else should I believe? Are you suggesting that MCEA is somehow anti-mask and doesn’t want teachers wearing them? Source?

. Have you ever considered looking at this issue outside of the pro-mask vs anti-mask binary so many posters here seem stuck on? That some of us can believe masks are sometimes necessary, and of course people should have the choice to wear them, but they have real downsides? I don't have the links, but I remember reading MCEA was talking about needing to end the mask mandate even during the omicron surge (of course they recommended waiting until the surge was over). I got the impression a lot of teachers were having a real hard time with them.

But acknowledging downsides can be done while also acknowledging benefits. Hence, teachers and students have choice. My whole argument is that people currently have choice. Above, you acknowledge that “people should have the choice to wear them.” Therefore, I’m not sure why you are disagreeing with me.

Several posters here seem to be under the impression there are no downsides. That’s the problem. If you’re going to choose to mask in the classroom, you should be aware of and acknowledge the harms that it brings to your students.

DP.

I think it's always important to acknowledge this, but always as part of a binary. There are negatives to masking, and negatives to not masking. If we can acknowledge both each time we make the acknowledgement of one, I think that's fine and have no objection to doing so.

What?

PP said several posters are "under the impression there are no downsides" and that if you are "going to choose to mask in the classroom, you should be aware of and acknowledge the harms that it brings ..."

Fair's fair. It goes both ways. If you are going to choose not to mask in the classroom, you should be aware of and acknowledge the harms that not masking brings, just as much as the reverse.

The OP clearly said she understands why the teacher wants to wear mask. The folks not acknowledging both sides are the people trying to claim she's a terrible person because she is concerned about the downsides.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There is no clear evidence that masks impact children’s speech or social skills. It’s just something that gets repeated because anti-maskers need a justification.

False. There is PLENTIFUL research on the impact of masks on communication; and pre-existing research on the role of faces and learning social skills/emotions/language. Beyond that, masks are an invasive intervention. It's just not true that you can mandate any intervention as long as there is not "clear evidence" against it. (Or whatever evidentiary standard you're using; it's a moving goal post.) Likewise claim that "blind kids learn to speak just fine, masks are not a problem!" is false. It's well known that visually impaired kids need specialized instruction for acquiring language and social skills because of the missing nonverbal cues.

I'm not even going to post the research here because there's so much. Anyone who is interested can search on Google Scholar.

There are also millions of dead people from covid. So what's your point? Teachers should risk their lives and well being for your benefit?

DP: The only point being made by OP and people who understand her point of view is that she has a valid reason to get her child switched to one of the other available classrooms. The does not harm the teacher in any way, shape, or form. This teacher can keep masking as she needs to do, and the child can have an adult model of speech in a different classroom whose facial expressions are fully available to her.

What happens when the OP finds out that the masked teacher is actually the stronger teacher? Would she demand her child be moved back? Or is the lack of a mask simply more important than any other variable?

Why are you setting up straw man arguments about things that didn't happen? You just want to keep arguing for the sake of arguing when there is an obvious and easy solution to OP's concern?

It’s a valid question. If the OP is going to burden the administration and two teachers with a schedule change, then that action is simply stating that the mask is the hill to die on. It is *the* defining, important characteristic for the OP. Classroom environment, teaching methods, etc., are less important.

I mean MCEA themselves lobbied for removing the mask mandate. They know it is a problem. This is not our f&cling imaginations.

Removing a mandate simply means masks aren’t required. People can still opt to wear them. All this means is that MCEA supports choice, which includes the choice to wear one.

You keep believing that

Um… what else should I believe? Are you suggesting that MCEA is somehow anti-mask and doesn’t want teachers wearing them? Source?

. Have you ever considered looking at this issue outside of the pro-mask vs anti-mask binary so many posters here seem stuck on? That some of us can believe masks are sometimes necessary, and of course people should have the choice to wear them, but they have real downsides? I don't have the links, but I remember reading MCEA was talking about needing to end the mask mandate even during the omicron surge (of course they recommended waiting until the surge was over). I got the impression a lot of teachers were having a real hard time with them.

But acknowledging downsides can be done while also acknowledging benefits. Hence, teachers and students have choice. My whole argument is that people currently have choice. Above, you acknowledge that “people should have the choice to wear them.” Therefore, I’m not sure why you are disagreeing with me.

Several posters here seem to be under the impression there are no downsides. That’s the problem. If you’re going to choose to mask in the classroom, you should be aware of and acknowledge the harms that it brings to your students.

What harm? There is far greater harm in having an outbreak in a classroom from covid. Have you consider the harm to the student, their family and our community with each outbreak? You may be done with covid, but covid is not done with us.

This thread is about a teacher masking. So now you think the teachers are responsible for protecting the classroom from outbreaks? Wow.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There is no clear evidence that masks impact children’s speech or social skills. It’s just something that gets repeated because anti-maskers need a justification.

False. There is PLENTIFUL research on the impact of masks on communication; and pre-existing research on the role of faces and learning social skills/emotions/language. Beyond that, masks are an invasive intervention. It's just not true that you can mandate any intervention as long as there is not "clear evidence" against it. (Or whatever evidentiary standard you're using; it's a moving goal post.) Likewise claim that "blind kids learn to speak just fine, masks are not a problem!" is false. It's well known that visually impaired kids need specialized instruction for acquiring language and social skills because of the missing nonverbal cues.

I'm not even going to post the research here because there's so much. Anyone who is interested can search on Google Scholar.

There are also millions of dead people from covid. So what's your point? Teachers should risk their lives and well being for your benefit?

DP: The only point being made by OP and people who understand her point of view is that she has a valid reason to get her child switched to one of the other available classrooms. The does not harm the teacher in any way, shape, or form. This teacher can keep masking as she needs to do, and the child can have an adult model of speech in a different classroom whose facial expressions are fully available to her.

What happens when the OP finds out that the masked teacher is actually the stronger teacher? Would she demand her child be moved back? Or is the lack of a mask simply more important than any other variable?

Why are you setting up straw man arguments about things that didn't happen? You just want to keep arguing for the sake of arguing when there is an obvious and easy solution to OP's concern?

It’s a valid question. If the OP is going to burden the administration and two teachers with a schedule change, then that action is simply stating that the mask is the hill to die on. It is *the* defining, important characteristic for the OP. Classroom environment, teaching methods, etc., are less important.

I mean MCEA themselves lobbied for removing the mask mandate. They know it is a problem. This is not our f&cling imaginations.

Removing a mandate simply means masks aren’t required. People can still opt to wear them. All this means is that MCEA supports choice, which includes the choice to wear one.

You keep believing that

Um… what else should I believe? Are you suggesting that MCEA is somehow anti-mask and doesn’t want teachers wearing them? Source?

. Have you ever considered looking at this issue outside of the pro-mask vs anti-mask binary so many posters here seem stuck on? That some of us can believe masks are sometimes necessary, and of course people should have the choice to wear them, but they have real downsides? I don't have the links, but I remember reading MCEA was talking about needing to end the mask mandate even during the omicron surge (of course they recommended waiting until the surge was over). I got the impression a lot of teachers were having a real hard time with them.

But acknowledging downsides can be done while also acknowledging benefits. Hence, teachers and students have choice. My whole argument is that people currently have choice. Above, you acknowledge that “people should have the choice to wear them.” Therefore, I’m not sure why you are disagreeing with me.

Several posters here seem to be under the impression there are no downsides. That’s the problem. If you’re going to choose to mask in the classroom, you should be aware of and acknowledge the harms that it brings to your students.

DP.

I think it's always important to acknowledge this, but always as part of a binary. There are negatives to masking, and negatives to not masking. If we can acknowledge both each time we make the acknowledgement of one, I think that's fine and have no objection to doing so.

What?

PP said several posters are "under the impression there are no downsides" and that if you are "going to choose to mask in the classroom, you should be aware of and acknowledge the harms that it brings ..."

Fair's fair. It goes both ways. If you are going to choose not to mask in the classroom, you should be aware of and acknowledge the harms that not masking brings, just as much as the reverse.

The OP clearly said she understands why the teacher wants to wear mask. The folks not acknowledging both sides are the people trying to claim she's a terrible person because she is concerned about the downsides.

Hey, if by "understands why the teacher wants to wear mask" we all mean and explicitly acknowledge that "there are also downsides to not wearing masks," then no problem.

(Anyone who disagrees can say so; if not, then we're on the same page.)

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There is no clear evidence that masks impact children’s speech or social skills. It’s just something that gets repeated because anti-maskers need a justification.

False. There is PLENTIFUL research on the impact of masks on communication; and pre-existing research on the role of faces and learning social skills/emotions/language. Beyond that, masks are an invasive intervention. It's just not true that you can mandate any intervention as long as there is not "clear evidence" against it. (Or whatever evidentiary standard you're using; it's a moving goal post.) Likewise claim that "blind kids learn to speak just fine, masks are not a problem!" is false. It's well known that visually impaired kids need specialized instruction for acquiring language and social skills because of the missing nonverbal cues.

I'm not even going to post the research here because there's so much. Anyone who is interested can search on Google Scholar.

There are also millions of dead people from covid. So what's your point? Teachers should risk their lives and well being for your benefit?

DP: The only point being made by OP and people who understand her point of view is that she has a valid reason to get her child switched to one of the other available classrooms. The does not harm the teacher in any way, shape, or form. This teacher can keep masking as she needs to do, and the child can have an adult model of speech in a different classroom whose facial expressions are fully available to her.

What happens when the OP finds out that the masked teacher is actually the stronger teacher? Would she demand her child be moved back? Or is the lack of a mask simply more important than any other variable?

Why are you setting up straw man arguments about things that didn't happen? You just want to keep arguing for the sake of arguing when there is an obvious and easy solution to OP's concern?

It’s a valid question. If the OP is going to burden the administration and two teachers with a schedule change, then that action is simply stating that the mask is the hill to die on. It is *the* defining, important characteristic for the OP. Classroom environment, teaching methods, etc., are less important.

I mean MCEA themselves lobbied for removing the mask mandate. They know it is a problem. This is not our f&cling imaginations.

Removing a mandate simply means masks aren’t required. People can still opt to wear them. All this means is that MCEA supports choice, which includes the choice to wear one.

You keep believing that

Um… what else should I believe? Are you suggesting that MCEA is somehow anti-mask and doesn’t want teachers wearing them? Source?

. Have you ever considered looking at this issue outside of the pro-mask vs anti-mask binary so many posters here seem stuck on? That some of us can believe masks are sometimes necessary, and of course people should have the choice to wear them, but they have real downsides? I don't have the links, but I remember reading MCEA was talking about needing to end the mask mandate even during the omicron surge (of course they recommended waiting until the surge was over). I got the impression a lot of teachers were having a real hard time with them.

But acknowledging downsides can be done while also acknowledging benefits. Hence, teachers and students have choice. My whole argument is that people currently have choice. Above, you acknowledge that “people should have the choice to wear them.” Therefore, I’m not sure why you are disagreeing with me.

Several posters here seem to be under the impression there are no downsides. That’s the problem. If you’re going to choose to mask in the classroom, you should be aware of and acknowledge the harms that it brings to your students.

DP.

I think it's always important to acknowledge this, but always as part of a binary. There are negatives to masking, and negatives to not masking. If we can acknowledge both each time we make the acknowledgement of one, I think that's fine and have no objection to doing so.

What?

PP said several posters are "under the impression there are no downsides" and that if you are "going to choose to mask in the classroom, you should be aware of and acknowledge the harms that it brings ..."

Fair's fair. It goes both ways. If you are going to choose not to mask in the classroom, you should be aware of and acknowledge the harms that not masking brings, just as much as the reverse.

The OP clearly said she understands why the teacher wants to wear mask. The folks not acknowledging both sides are the people trying to claim she's a terrible person because she is concerned about the downsides.

Hey, if by "understands why the teacher wants to wear mask" we all mean and explicitly acknowledge that "there are also downsides to not wearing masks," then no problem.

(Anyone who disagrees can say so; if not, then we're on the same page.)

Yes, as is happens there are a lot of people, including myself, and, it seems, OP, that recognize that masks reduce transmission, but still choose not to wear them. I know this doesn't jive with your internal "pro-mask/anti-mask" binary, but it's where most people in MoCo are at.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There is no clear evidence that masks impact children’s speech or social skills. It’s just something that gets repeated because anti-maskers need a justification.

False. There is PLENTIFUL research on the impact of masks on communication; and pre-existing research on the role of faces and learning social skills/emotions/language. Beyond that, masks are an invasive intervention. It's just not true that you can mandate any intervention as long as there is not "clear evidence" against it. (Or whatever evidentiary standard you're using; it's a moving goal post.) Likewise claim that "blind kids learn to speak just fine, masks are not a problem!" is false. It's well known that visually impaired kids need specialized instruction for acquiring language and social skills because of the missing nonverbal cues.

I'm not even going to post the research here because there's so much. Anyone who is interested can search on Google Scholar.

There are also millions of dead people from covid. So what's your point? Teachers should risk their lives and well being for your benefit?

DP: The only point being made by OP and people who understand her point of view is that she has a valid reason to get her child switched to one of the other available classrooms. The does not harm the teacher in any way, shape, or form. This teacher can keep masking as she needs to do, and the child can have an adult model of speech in a different classroom whose facial expressions are fully available to her.

What happens when the OP finds out that the masked teacher is actually the stronger teacher? Would she demand her child be moved back? Or is the lack of a mask simply more important than any other variable?

Why are you setting up straw man arguments about things that didn't happen? You just want to keep arguing for the sake of arguing when there is an obvious and easy solution to OP's concern?

It’s a valid question. If the OP is going to burden the administration and two teachers with a schedule change, then that action is simply stating that the mask is the hill to die on. It is *the* defining, important characteristic for the OP. Classroom environment, teaching methods, etc., are less important.

I mean MCEA themselves lobbied for removing the mask mandate. They know it is a problem. This is not our f&cling imaginations.

Removing a mandate simply means masks aren’t required. People can still opt to wear them. All this means is that MCEA supports choice, which includes the choice to wear one.

You keep believing that

Um… what else should I believe? Are you suggesting that MCEA is somehow anti-mask and doesn’t want teachers wearing them? Source?

. Have you ever considered looking at this issue outside of the pro-mask vs anti-mask binary so many posters here seem stuck on? That some of us can believe masks are sometimes necessary, and of course people should have the choice to wear them, but they have real downsides? I don't have the links, but I remember reading MCEA was talking about needing to end the mask mandate even during the omicron surge (of course they recommended waiting until the surge was over). I got the impression a lot of teachers were having a real hard time with them.

But acknowledging downsides can be done while also acknowledging benefits. Hence, teachers and students have choice. My whole argument is that people currently have choice. Above, you acknowledge that “people should have the choice to wear them.” Therefore, I’m not sure why you are disagreeing with me.

Several posters here seem to be under the impression there are no downsides. That’s the problem. If you’re going to choose to mask in the classroom, you should be aware of and acknowledge the harms that it brings to your students.

DP.

I think it's always important to acknowledge this, but always as part of a binary. There are negatives to masking, and negatives to not masking. If we can acknowledge both each time we make the acknowledgement of one, I think that's fine and have no objection to doing so.

What?

PP said several posters are "under the impression there are no downsides" and that if you are "going to choose to mask in the classroom, you should be aware of and acknowledge the harms that it brings ..."

Fair's fair. It goes both ways. If you are going to choose not to mask in the classroom, you should be aware of and acknowledge the harms that not masking brings, just as much as the reverse.

Okay?

Gently, you probably shouldn’t be on message boards if you haven’t the mental capacity to keep up.