BOE Fall Plan Meeting

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It is unlikely there will be any in-person school. I think they spent significantly more time trying to explain the plan, then the board got time to discuss it and ask questions.

This is a ploy, mcps presents an overly complicated plan that will never work. Teachers are opposed to teaching in the classroom, and Coved numbers are skewing slightly up. When it turns out we will be distance learning the whole year, Jack Smith can blame the unions. Not his fault.

Back to the overly complicated plan. Every 3 weeks, high schoolers attend 4 days of school? And the rest of the time they're having sex, getting pregnant and getting STDs, not to mention smoking and drinking too much and getting into car accidents. Younger kids, left at home without their parents are burning down their homes, or one parent quits their job to oversee the young 'uns.

As for fall Sports, which was asked about by Smondrowski, O'Neill and maybe someone else, they punted. It's unlikely, but they said the state would decide, not them. My money is on not a chance.

We can't have Elementary schoolers in middle school and high school buildings, because the buildings don't meet the code for the students. not to mention it would take so many hours to study such a plan.

Is anyone else sick and tired of listening to the mcps staff talk about how many hours they're working? And how hard they're working? First off they should be grateful to have a job. Second off, do they not think the rest of us aren't trying to figure out how to manage our jobs, and take care of our children, and stay alive? We're all doing the same damn thing, the pandemic is worldwide. I wish they would stop wasting everyone's time patting themselves on the back for something the rest of us do everyday.

And by the way, the parent survey just closed. No way they used any data from the survey to inform any of this nonsensical plan.

Agree with ALL of this.

Teachers aren’t the only ones who have it tough. So many of us have had to make adjustments to our jobs and lives. My neighbor is a dentist who spent tons of time researching fogging systems and redesigned his practice so that he could get back to work safely. He works more now for less money because he can’t see as many patients and has to spend money on PPE. Restaurants have had a really tough time but have found ways to make it work for the time being.

This sucks all around but teachers don’t have it worse than anyone else. It sucks for everyone all over the world. Full stop.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Because we wanna go to bars and restaurants and the beach and not wear masks more than we want to get case counts low enough to get kids back in schools.

Here's my new favorite tool: Event risk assessment "The risk level is the estimated chance (0-100%) that at least 1 COVID-19 positive individual will be present at an event in a county, given the size of the event"
Today, for a 10 person event (ES classroom) there is a 10% chance that one of the people there is COVID-19 positive. For a 100 person event (7 HS classes) there is a 65% likelihood that someone will be COVID-19 positive. When we get case counts low enough that the chance is <1%, then lets talk about sending kids back. Until then, stop blaming MCPS for the problem.

If you're going to assess risk, don't assess the risk that there will be somebody in the building with you who has covid. Assess the risk that you will actually get covid from somebody in the building with you who has covid. And if you're wearing a mask, and this person who may or may not be in the building with you is wearing a mask, the risk that you will actually get covid is very low.

Umm, no. Because if they test positive, your kid & their teacher will be home on mandatory quarantine.

The outcome you're trying to prevent is people being home on quarantine? And you're trying to prevent this outcome (people staying home) by keeping schools closed so people stay home?

And you're trying to open schools, only to have classrooms and perhaps entire schools close -- possibly repeatedly -- when people inevitably test positive? Stable DL is preferable to chaotic in-person.

That is your personal opinion. Other people's opinions may be different from yours.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It is unlikely there will be any in-person school. I think they spent significantly more time trying to explain the plan, then the board got time to discuss it and ask questions.

This is a ploy, mcps presents an overly complicated plan that will never work. Teachers are opposed to teaching in the classroom, and Coved numbers are skewing slightly up. When it turns out we will be distance learning the whole year, Jack Smith can blame the unions. Not his fault.

It might be helpful for him as a bargaining position to blame the unions, but it would be more realistic for him to blame Travis Gayles.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Because we wanna go to bars and restaurants and the beach and not wear masks more than we want to get case counts low enough to get kids back in schools.

Here's my new favorite tool: Event risk assessment "The risk level is the estimated chance (0-100%) that at least 1 COVID-19 positive individual will be present at an event in a county, given the size of the event"
Today, for a 10 person event (ES classroom) there is a 10% chance that one of the people there is COVID-19 positive. For a 100 person event (7 HS classes) there is a 65% likelihood that someone will be COVID-19 positive. When we get case counts low enough that the chance is <1%, then lets talk about sending kids back. Until then, stop blaming MCPS for the problem.

If you're going to assess risk, don't assess the risk that there will be somebody in the building with you who has covid. Assess the risk that you will actually get covid from somebody in the building with you who has covid. And if you're wearing a mask, and this person who may or may not be in the building with you is wearing a mask, the risk that you will actually get covid is very low.

Umm, no. Because if they test positive, your kid & their teacher will be home on mandatory quarantine.

The outcome you're trying to prevent is people being home on quarantine? And you're trying to prevent this outcome (people staying home) by keeping schools closed so people stay home?

And you're trying to open schools, only to have classrooms and perhaps entire schools close -- possibly repeatedly -- when people inevitably test positive? Stable DL is preferable to chaotic in-person.

That is your personal opinion. Other people's opinions may be different from yours.

DP, and also, why do you presume stable DL? I mean, you do know that many kids don't have an adult at home who can manage their DL full-time, and many other kids have unsafe homes, right? They don't matter because...?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Because we wanna go to bars and restaurants and the beach and not wear masks more than we want to get case counts low enough to get kids back in schools.

Here's my new favorite tool: Event risk assessment "The risk level is the estimated chance (0-100%) that at least 1 COVID-19 positive individual will be present at an event in a county, given the size of the event"
Today, for a 10 person event (ES classroom) there is a 10% chance that one of the people there is COVID-19 positive. For a 100 person event (7 HS classes) there is a 65% likelihood that someone will be COVID-19 positive. When we get case counts low enough that the chance is <1%, then lets talk about sending kids back. Until then, stop blaming MCPS for the problem.

If you're going to assess risk, don't assess the risk that there will be somebody in the building with you who has covid. Assess the risk that you will actually get covid from somebody in the building with you who has covid. And if you're wearing a mask, and this person who may or may not be in the building with you is wearing a mask, the risk that you will actually get covid is very low.

Umm, no. Because if they test positive, your kid & their teacher will be home on mandatory quarantine.

The outcome you're trying to prevent is people being home on quarantine? And you're trying to prevent this outcome (people staying home) by keeping schools closed so people stay home?

And you're trying to open schools, only to have classrooms and perhaps entire schools close -- possibly repeatedly -- when people inevitably test positive? Stable DL is preferable to chaotic in-person.

That is your personal opinion. Other people's opinions may be different from yours.

DP, and also, why do you presume stable DL? I mean, you do know that many kids don't have an adult at home who can manage their DL full-time, and many other kids have unsafe homes, right? They don't matter because...?

DP

Agreed. An optional hybrid model, with appropriate precautions (half the kids in school at a time) does not have to be chaotic.

And a year of Distance Learning will undoubtedly have dire consequences to the education of lower-income Black and Brown kids.

It is abundantly clear that the Achievement Gap no longer matters to MCPS.

MCPS and the BOE / Jack Smith were only focused on the Achievement Gap when it pissed off wealthy white people in Potomac. Now, when push comes to shove and they can actually make a solid difference, they choose not to.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Because we wanna go to bars and restaurants and the beach and not wear masks more than we want to get case counts low enough to get kids back in schools.

Here's my new favorite tool: Event risk assessment "The risk level is the estimated chance (0-100%) that at least 1 COVID-19 positive individual will be present at an event in a county, given the size of the event"
Today, for a 10 person event (ES classroom) there is a 10% chance that one of the people there is COVID-19 positive. For a 100 person event (7 HS classes) there is a 65% likelihood that someone will be COVID-19 positive. When we get case counts low enough that the chance is <1%, then lets talk about sending kids back. Until then, stop blaming MCPS for the problem.

If you're going to assess risk, don't assess the risk that there will be somebody in the building with you who has covid. Assess the risk that you will actually get covid from somebody in the building with you who has covid. And if you're wearing a mask, and this person who may or may not be in the building with you is wearing a mask, the risk that you will actually get covid is very low.

Umm, no. Because if they test positive, your kid & their teacher will be home on mandatory quarantine.

The outcome you're trying to prevent is people being home on quarantine? And you're trying to prevent this outcome (people staying home) by keeping schools closed so people stay home?

DP

It is absolute madness.

It appears that the Anti-science fearmongers have won out in MoCo.

There is very little additional risk to have schools re-open with reasonable safety measures.

Yet it appears that we will likely be stuck with an entire year of distance learning.

[Anonymous]

During the full DL part, schools should be made into DL centers, limited to families that have two working parents, other needs, etc., with social distancing.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

DP

Agreed. An optional hybrid model, with appropriate precautions (half the kids in school at a time) does not have to be chaotic.

And a year of Distance Learning will undoubtedly have dire consequences to the education of lower-income Black and Brown kids.

It is abundantly clear that the Achievement Gap no longer matters to MCPS.

MCPS and the BOE / Jack Smith were only focused on the Achievement Gap when it pissed off wealthy white people in Potomac. Now, when push comes to shove and they can actually make a solid difference, they choose not to.

I don't think they actually have a choice. It was pretty clear yesterday that Travis Gayles did not want schools to open, and he has the last word about it in the county.

[Anonymous]

I don't think they actually have a choice. It was pretty clear yesterday that Travis Gayles did not want schools to open, and he has the last word about it in the county.

Does he have the last word?

Is he going to prevent private schools from opening too?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

I don't think they actually have a choice. It was pretty clear yesterday that Travis Gayles did not want schools to open, and he has the last word about it in the county.

Does he have the last word?

Is he going to prevent private schools from opening too?

Good question. Is Travis Gayles the one who ultimately decides?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

I don't think they actually have a choice. It was pretty clear yesterday that Travis Gayles did not want schools to open, and he has the last word about it in the county.

Does he have the last word?

Is he going to prevent private schools from opening too?

I am pretty sure that he *can*. I don't know if he *will*.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

I don't think they actually have a choice. It was pretty clear yesterday that Travis Gayles did not want schools to open, and he has the last word about it in the county.

Does he have the last word?

Is he going to prevent private schools from opening too?

I am pretty sure that he *can*. I don't know if he *will*.

I don't think any schools in MoCo will be allowed to open until phase 3, including privates.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Excellent first question from new SMOB. (What happens if a student tests positive?)

MCPS and Health department will coordinate. They will do full contact tracing in the building and will identify close contacts to quarantine and spaces that need cleaning. Might be just a classroom, might be the whole school.

My guess is that few people here have been through contact tracing. I have. It is very comprehensive. If I am in the copier room trying to make materials for all of my preps, I will be in there for more than 15 min. Anyone else trying to work in that room, to use the laminator or other equipment would have had sufficient exposure to be told to quarantine for 14 days. As a precaution, we would need to limit work room occupancy to one person at a time. However, our workroom also has all of things a teacher needs to create instructional materials, including printers.

Moreover, all of our teachers except art room share. This means that teachers spend their planning periods camped out in other spaces around the school. I prefer to work in my department office, but two other people are in there at the same time. If I went to the media center or lounge, I would be around even more people for more than 15 min. How can I social distance for my protection and that of others when there’s no available space in the school? Would you recommend that I sit outside of the building and try to plan or create materials sitting on the black top? For 85 min? In all weather?

If all of the teachers have masks on, risk of transmission is remarkably low. Medical folks have been wearing masks and in close proximity for months. If a co-worker tested positive, the remainder of staff was/is not quarantined.

The same would hold true for kids back in school. I agree this would be much harder for younger students, but MS and HS students can wear masks all day and, at least by CDC standards, would not need to be quarantined.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Excellent first question from new SMOB. (What happens if a student tests positive?)

MCPS and Health department will coordinate. They will do full contact tracing in the building and will identify close contacts to quarantine and spaces that need cleaning. Might be just a classroom, might be the whole school.

My guess is that few people here have been through contact tracing. I have. It is very comprehensive. If I am in the copier room trying to make materials for all of my preps, I will be in there for more than 15 min. Anyone else trying to work in that room, to use the laminator or other equipment would have had sufficient exposure to be told to quarantine for 14 days. As a precaution, we would need to limit work room occupancy to one person at a time. However, our workroom also has all of things a teacher needs to create instructional materials, including printers.

Moreover, all of our teachers except art room share. This means that teachers spend their planning periods camped out in other spaces around the school. I prefer to work in my department office, but two other people are in there at the same time. If I went to the media center or lounge, I would be around even more people for more than 15 min. How can I social distance for my protection and that of others when there’s no available space in the school? Would you recommend that I sit outside of the building and try to plan or create materials sitting on the black top? For 85 min? In all weather?

If all of the teachers have masks on, risk of transmission is remarkably low. Medical folks have been wearing masks and in close proximity for months. If a co-worker tested positive, the remainder of staff was/is not quarantined.

The same would hold true for kids back in school. I agree this would be much harder for younger students, but MS and HS students can wear masks all day and, at least by CDC standards, would not need to be quarantined.

They do eat lunch.

[Anonymous]

I eat lunch at work. I social distance...a lot. This could also be figured out.