Classrooms for kids <12 will close for 10 days w/ any positives; will there be virtual instruction?
![[Post New]](/jforum/templates/default/images/icon_minipost_new.gif){kind=icon}
Anonymous
Why would you opt out of testing? You are putting your kids and other kids at risk. Or, you know it and don't care. |
Anonymous
There are a ton of false positives and 10 days with no instruction is completely unreasonable. |
Anonymous
So let's say you are taking Calculus and a classmate tests positive. The vaccinated teacher and 12 vaccinated kids stay in school but the 15 kids who are unvaccinated go home for 10 days and learn nothing? Does the class continue to learn without them? |
Anonymous
|
Reposting from another thread:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/outlook/2021/04/19/schools-covid-testing-cost/ "But there are downsides to systematic testing that have been insufficiently considered, including costs, lost learning time, logistics and stress for those subjected to such a regime. False-positive results — which say you are infected when you aren’t — pose particular problems. Overall, this kind of widespread testing fails cost-benefit analysis: It will drain already insufficient public school resources while doing little to improve safety. " "First, classrooms have thankfully been found — in studies examining schools in multiple states — to be places of limited disease transmission, compared with communities at large. The rate of transmission within schools from individuals who test positive has been estimated to be on the order of 0.5 percent to 0.7 percent (and this includes people exhibiting symptoms). A rate that low implies that a testing regimen would need to identify roughly 200 infected people to prevent one person from transmitting the disease in school. It would take an awful lot of tests to achieve those numbers. In New York City, where more than 234,000 asymptomatic students and staff members across approximately 1,600 schools were tested last fall, the overall rate of positive tests was only 0.4 percent. That suggests that — even during a time of high community spread — about 40,000 tests among asymptomatic individuals would need to be performed to prevent one in-school transmission." "And how accurate are these tests? Rapid antigen and saliva PCR tests, which are frequently used in schools, can have a false positive rate of 1 or 2 percent. That may sound low, but statisticians know that, when testing in a setting of low prevalence of disease, even a single-digit false-positive rate can be extremely problematic. The current prevalence rate for the coronavirus in the United States is roughly 15 cases per 10,000 people per week. (Prevalence in schools tends to be similar to, or lower than, that in the surrounding community.) If you give 10,000 people a test that produces false positives 2 percent of the time, that means you might get 215 positives: 15 true positives and 200 false positives. In other words, more than 90 percent of the positive test results will be incorrect." |
Anonymous
|
They need to switch to the model tested in the UK, where close contacts are tested daily instead of quarantined. https://www.bbc.com/news/health-57930214
Also, why are the cohorts mixing at Janney? Or was this an unvaccinated teacher/staff member who was present in both cohorts? Mandatory vaccination, now. |
Anonymous
Maybe the Janney cohorts mixed at lunch or recess or another activity? Or maybe it was a staff member who was positive? It wasn't shared with the school. Regardless, one positive sent every kid who was on campus home for 2 weeks. |
Anonymous
FWIW, current health guidance allows for students to mix in 1 additional cohort (so two cohorts mixing is very possible) |
Anonymous
This! This is the most reasonable way. |
Anonymous
No, the PP correctly thinks that asymptomatic testing does more harm than good, especially when any positive leads to blanket, long-term quarantines of large numbers of kids. Read up on it. |
Anonymous
| Man, I love these Janney threads. Y’all are absolutely bonkers! Godspeed to the staff there lol |
Anonymous
|
Janney's action in sending an entire cohort home is inconsistent with CDC guidelines for what type of "close contact" requires quarantine:
Exception: In the K–12 indoor classroom setting, the close contact definition excludes students who were within 3 to 6 feet of an infected student (laboratory-confirmed or a clinically compatible illness) where - both students were engaged in consistent and correct use of well-fitting masks; and - other K–12 school prevention strategies (such as universal and correct mask use, physical distancing, increased ventilation) were in place in the K–12 school setting. https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/php/contact-tracing/contact-tracing-plan/appendix.html#contact |
Anonymous
yes, it's inconsistent with CDC guidelines but it's consistent with the OSSE guidelines! That's the whole point of this thread. The OSSE guidelines (as followed by Janney and previously this summer by Banneker) are what led to the quarantine. The question remains: will the schools provide any instruction when these happens repeatedly during the school year? |
Anonymous
The question remains: when is OSSE going to follow the CDC so we quit harming kids unnecessarily? |
Anonymous
That is the million dollar question. It's what makes the Janney situation worrisome--it's proof that DCPS is following the policy now. It should be sobering to any of us with kids in DCPS. They're actually following this quarantine policy that is not really compatible with in-person school. |
Anonymous
This is not a Janney thread. This is the canary in the coalmine. |