Charters: When is yours dropping the outdoor mask mandate?

[Anonymous]

Yu Ying is dropping the outdoor mandate on Monday.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Considering that cdc guidance flips and flips I don’t see the need to rush unmasking.

I do see a lot of parents frustrated or looking to be frustrated about something and passing it on to their kids. It’s sad really.

My kids are fine masking and I’m less paranoid (DC “low status and kids vaccinated).

I reall hope all the “follow the science” people don’t sit around the table and talk to their kids like the do on here. You might want to stop and see if the “issues” w your kid stops.

Dying laughing that following the science is now an insult. You sound like one of those climate change denying nut jobs.

It’s because the “follow the science” people here are freaking out over very little and say things like DC will NEVER remove masks at schools. And the next day DCPS removed masks outside.

These people also no zero about public health or communication outside of here is a 500 page report.

We should follow the science and I think schools w a certain percentage vax rate should remove masks. This would prevent schools w pre schools from doing that. That to me would be follow the science.

Lol…derides people for wanting to follow CDC guidance, saying they don’t know anything about public health, then MAKES UP OWN RULES and says those are best. Oh god do you even see the hypocrisy?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Nothing but there are bigger fish to fry in my very personal likely not shared by other parents opinion.

Like, if there is a positive in a prek3 class, the whole class is still home for at least 7 days. If a kid tests positive, they are home at least 10 days. If a kids sibling tests positive, both are home at least 10 days.

And then there is the daily form where you state your kid doesn't have covid symptoms. At this point, we should agree that is just a waste of time?

At the same time, last year was so bad I'm just happy they get to go most days.

Oh many you need to push for test-to-stay.

It would be akin to banging my head against a brick wall. They have already said that because kids eat lunch together unmasked, they cannot do test to stay. The app and the masks feel mild compared to the real possibility of more weeks at home but I learned last year that screaming into the wind only left me tired and changed nothing.

Our charter has actually said that it is looking to drop outdoor masking but needs OSSE to weigh in on the test to stay program currently in place. For me, at this point, I would be happy to see the end of masking all together, but it seems very reasonable to make sure that removing masks outdoors doesn't threaten the ability of the (what are mostly the) PK3 and PK4 kids to stay in school following an exposure.

Can you (or anyone) explain this relationship between test-to-stay and outdoor masking?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Considering that cdc guidance flips and flips I don’t see the need to rush unmasking.

I do see a lot of parents frustrated or looking to be frustrated about something and passing it on to their kids. It’s sad really.

My kids are fine masking and I’m less paranoid (DC “low status and kids vaccinated).

I reall hope all the “follow the science” people don’t sit around the table and talk to their kids like the do on here. You might want to stop and see if the “issues” w your kid stops.

Dying laughing that following the science is now an insult. You sound like one of those climate change denying nut jobs.

It’s because the “follow the science” people here are freaking out over very little and say things like DC will NEVER remove masks at schools. And the next day DCPS removed masks outside.

These people also no zero about public health or communication outside of here is a 500 page report.

We should follow the science and I think schools w a certain percentage vax rate should remove masks. This would prevent schools w pre schools from doing that. That to me would be follow the science.

NP. I'm sorry, but saying kids need to be vaccinated to be able to unmask is NOT following the science. My kids (5-11) got vaccinated in November, but neither the efficacy data for this vaccine nor the data regarding the risk this virus poses to children supports this position.

And the assertion that the only reason that continued masking could possibly pose a problem for children is their parents' frustration is equally ridiculous.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Nothing but there are bigger fish to fry in my very personal likely not shared by other parents opinion.

Like, if there is a positive in a prek3 class, the whole class is still home for at least 7 days. If a kid tests positive, they are home at least 10 days. If a kids sibling tests positive, both are home at least 10 days.

And then there is the daily form where you state your kid doesn't have covid symptoms. At this point, we should agree that is just a waste of time?

At the same time, last year was so bad I'm just happy they get to go most days.

Oh many you need to push for test-to-stay.

It would be akin to banging my head against a brick wall. They have already said that because kids eat lunch together unmasked, they cannot do test to stay. The app and the masks feel mild compared to the real possibility of more weeks at home but I learned last year that screaming into the wind only left me tired and changed nothing.

Our charter has actually said that it is looking to drop outdoor masking but needs OSSE to weigh in on the test to stay program currently in place. For me, at this point, I would be happy to see the end of masking all together, but it seems very reasonable to make sure that removing masks outdoors doesn't threaten the ability of the (what are mostly the) PK3 and PK4 kids to stay in school following an exposure.

Can you (or anyone) explain this relationship between test-to-stay and outdoor masking?

I’m assuming I’m at the same charter as referenced above (LAMB). I’m having trouble fully understanding too, but the explanation was this:

“Currently, test-to-stay participation requires that the student be masked when exposed to a positive case, even outdoors. OSSE is aware that removing the outdoor mask rule means that fewer students can test-to-stay. They are in the process of addressing the conflicts in these two guidelines. We expect those changes in the next couple of weeks. We eagerly look forward to not wearing our masks outdoors and we will make that change as soon as DC Health and OSSE address the policy conflict. We are not imposing different rules for students who are vaccinated versus those who are not due to fairness and equity concerns. In the meantime, we ask that parents continue to wear masks outdoors during arrival and dismissal.”

YY and MV are removing outdoor mask mandates. Does this mean they don’t have test-to-stay programs?

The request for parents to continue masking outside at drop off and pick up is ridiculous to me, but I’m not surprised at all.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Nothing but there are bigger fish to fry in my very personal likely not shared by other parents opinion.

Like, if there is a positive in a prek3 class, the whole class is still home for at least 7 days. If a kid tests positive, they are home at least 10 days. If a kids sibling tests positive, both are home at least 10 days.

And then there is the daily form where you state your kid doesn't have covid symptoms. At this point, we should agree that is just a waste of time?

At the same time, last year was so bad I'm just happy they get to go most days.

Oh many you need to push for test-to-stay.

It would be akin to banging my head against a brick wall. They have already said that because kids eat lunch together unmasked, they cannot do test to stay. The app and the masks feel mild compared to the real possibility of more weeks at home but I learned last year that screaming into the wind only left me tired and changed nothing.

Our charter has actually said that it is looking to drop outdoor masking but needs OSSE to weigh in on the test to stay program currently in place. For me, at this point, I would be happy to see the end of masking all together, but it seems very reasonable to make sure that removing masks outdoors doesn't threaten the ability of the (what are mostly the) PK3 and PK4 kids to stay in school following an exposure.

Can you (or anyone) explain this relationship between test-to-stay and outdoor masking?

I’m assuming I’m at the same charter as referenced above (LAMB). I’m having trouble fully understanding too, but the explanation was this:

“Currently, test-to-stay participation requires that the student be masked when exposed to a positive case, even outdoors. OSSE is aware that removing the outdoor mask rule means that fewer students can test-to-stay. They are in the process of addressing the conflicts in these two guidelines. We expect those changes in the next couple of weeks. We eagerly look forward to not wearing our masks outdoors and we will make that change as soon as DC Health and OSSE address the policy conflict. We are not imposing different rules for students who are vaccinated versus those who are not due to fairness and equity concerns. In the meantime, we ask that parents continue to wear masks outdoors during arrival and dismissal.”

YY and MV are removing outdoor mask mandates. Does this mean they don’t have test-to-stay programs?

The request for parents to continue masking outside at drop off and pick up is ridiculous to me, but I’m not surprised at all.

There should be two policies one for vaccinated kids and one for not.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Nothing but there are bigger fish to fry in my very personal likely not shared by other parents opinion.

Like, if there is a positive in a prek3 class, the whole class is still home for at least 7 days. If a kid tests positive, they are home at least 10 days. If a kids sibling tests positive, both are home at least 10 days.

And then there is the daily form where you state your kid doesn't have covid symptoms. At this point, we should agree that is just a waste of time?

At the same time, last year was so bad I'm just happy they get to go most days.

Oh many you need to push for test-to-stay.

It would be akin to banging my head against a brick wall. They have already said that because kids eat lunch together unmasked, they cannot do test to stay. The app and the masks feel mild compared to the real possibility of more weeks at home but I learned last year that screaming into the wind only left me tired and changed nothing.

Our charter has actually said that it is looking to drop outdoor masking but needs OSSE to weigh in on the test to stay program currently in place. For me, at this point, I would be happy to see the end of masking all together, but it seems very reasonable to make sure that removing masks outdoors doesn't threaten the ability of the (what are mostly the) PK3 and PK4 kids to stay in school following an exposure.

Can you (or anyone) explain this relationship between test-to-stay and outdoor masking?

I’m assuming I’m at the same charter as referenced above (LAMB). I’m having trouble fully understanding too, but the explanation was this:

“Currently, test-to-stay participation requires that the student be masked when exposed to a positive case, even outdoors. OSSE is aware that removing the outdoor mask rule means that fewer students can test-to-stay. They are in the process of addressing the conflicts in these two guidelines. We expect those changes in the next couple of weeks. We eagerly look forward to not wearing our masks outdoors and we will make that change as soon as DC Health and OSSE address the policy conflict. We are not imposing different rules for students who are vaccinated versus those who are not due to fairness and equity concerns. In the meantime, we ask that parents continue to wear masks outdoors during arrival and dismissal.”

YY and MV are removing outdoor mask mandates. Does this mean they don’t have test-to-stay programs?

The request for parents to continue masking outside at drop off and pick up is ridiculous to me, but I’m not surprised at all.

There should be two policies one for vaccinated kids and one for not.

Why? The vaccine is Basically useless after a month. Kids that have had Covid are probably better protected. My kids are vaccinated but I think everyone should be able to unmask.

[Anonymous]

I am so annoyed with the our parent listserve. There are like 5 people congratulating each other on their shared fervor for unmasking. And then acting like they somehow speak for the whole parent community. I’m literally sitting in a kids play place currently and every single family of color is masked and every white family is unmasked. This is an issue of equity as we all know families of color are at higher risk. But yes, let’s let privileged white families speak for all!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I am so annoyed with the our parent listserve. There are like 5 people congratulating each other on their shared fervor for unmasking. And then acting like they somehow speak for the whole parent community. I’m literally sitting in a kids play place currently and every single family of color is masked and every white family is unmasked. This is an issue of equity as we all know families of color are at higher risk. But yes, let’s let privileged white families speak for all!

Kids of color are at equally low risk if they are vaccinated.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I am so annoyed with the our parent listserve. There are like 5 people congratulating each other on their shared fervor for unmasking. And then acting like they somehow speak for the whole parent community. I’m literally sitting in a kids play place currently and every single family of color is masked and every white family is unmasked. This is an issue of equity as we all know families of color are at higher risk. But yes, let’s let privileged white families speak for all!

I am a teacher in a diverse school division. We dropped indoor mask mandates (never required kids to mask outside). I would say half of my students went maskless the first week and they are all people of color. My white students are all still wearing masks. Not that it really matters. They don’t really wear them correctly and often pull them down to talk to people.

The pro mask contingent at my kids charter is definitely the most vocal. I don’t care that much but I think people put too much stock in mask effectiveness, especially at the elementary level.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am so annoyed with the our parent listserve. There are like 5 people congratulating each other on their shared fervor for unmasking. And then acting like they somehow speak for the whole parent community. I’m literally sitting in a kids play place currently and every single family of color is masked and every white family is unmasked. This is an issue of equity as we all know families of color are at higher risk. But yes, let’s let privileged white families speak for all!

Kids of color are at equally low risk if they are vaccinated.

They are also low risk unvaccinated. Kids are low risk in general. My unvaccinated kids (too young) were completely asymptomatic when they had COVID.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I am so annoyed with the our parent listserve. There are like 5 people congratulating each other on their shared fervor for unmasking. And then acting like they somehow speak for the whole parent community. I’m literally sitting in a kids play place currently and every single family of color is masked and every white family is unmasked. This is an issue of equity as we all know families of color are at higher risk. But yes, let’s let privileged white families speak for all!

If they are at a kids play place they aren't really risk averse. The mask isn't going to make much difference here.

[Anonymous]

Cap City has dropped outdoor masking starting Monday. And given how conservative AND fearful Cap City has been, if they can drop it, I can’t believe every charter is not dropping it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am so annoyed with the our parent listserve. There are like 5 people congratulating each other on their shared fervor for unmasking. And then acting like they somehow speak for the whole parent community. I’m literally sitting in a kids play place currently and every single family of color is masked and every white family is unmasked. This is an issue of equity as we all know families of color are at higher risk. But yes, let’s let privileged white families speak for all!

If they are at a kids play place they aren't really risk averse. The mask isn't going to make much difference here.

If they are at a kids play place they are also in the same socioeconomic background as the white families. It money not race that puts someone at risk.

[Anonymous]

We were at an outdoor religious service today in DC. Everyone masked. Also went to an indoor heritage language program -everyone wore masks. MCPS still had masks. Why would DCPC be riskier than others?