We are NEVER going back until covid is 100% gone - MCPS has no leadership

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Hybrid involves greater: expense, and risks, but involves even less school than DL. People should accept the reality of the situation and make the best of it.

Another person against the hybrid option: more complicated, higher risk, less school, so what's the benefit?

Exactly. There is no benefit.

We all need to make sure our voices are heard. We need a full F2F option and a full DL option. Email the board. Submit testimony. Encourage your friends and neighbors to do the same.

There is no benefit aside from breaking the ice to get back to full F2F. You think MCPS is just going to make that leap next year without testing the waters first?

I would hope that MCPS would make that leap this year, namely in February at the start of the second semester.

They have to, at least for elementary.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

I'm in favor of full F2F now, but I just don't think the MCPS leadership has the leadership capacity to pull it off now/next year without interim steps. Their inaction is always excused away with "it's too hard because they're too big...so they shouldn't even try."

First: it's the interim steps that are hard. MCPS knows how to do regular school.

Second: the "it's too hard" stuff is what you read on DCUM. The people who are actually making these decisions are not wasting their time posting on and reading the 103rd interminable thread on the same topic on DCUM.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

I'm in favor of full F2F now, but I just don't think the MCPS leadership has the leadership capacity to pull it off now/next year without interim steps. Their inaction is always excused away with "it's too hard because they're too big...so they shouldn't even try."

First: it's the interim steps that are hard. MCPS knows how to do regular school.

Second: the "it's too hard" stuff is what you read on DCUM. The people who are actually making these decisions are not wasting their time posting on and reading the 103rd interminable thread on the same topic on DCUM.

DP- I think it’s because MCPS seems somewhat paralyzed, which many reasonably interpret as it being “too hard.”

For ES anyway, I agree options for full F2F and full DL make the most sense. Do a proper survey and see how many families want to return and figure it out. Heck if the math is too hard for them I’d be fully on board for hiring a consultant to help them figure out how to properly space and allocate students/staff to buildings.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Hybrid involves greater: expense, and risks, but involves even less school than DL. People should accept the reality of the situation and make the best of it.

Another person against the hybrid option: more complicated, higher risk, less school, so what's the benefit?

Exactly. There is no benefit.

We all need to make sure our voices are heard. We need a full F2F option and a full DL option. Email the board. Submit testimony. Encourage your friends and neighbors to do the same.

There is no benefit aside from breaking the ice to get back to full F2F. You think MCPS is just going to make that leap next year without testing the waters first?

Is it really that much of a benefit though? If only half of the families want to cone back in the first place, you’ll have, on average, half the normal amount of kids in the classroom off the bat.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Hybrid involves greater: expense, and risks, but involves even less school than DL. People should accept the reality of the situation and make the best of it.

Another person against the hybrid option: more complicated, higher risk, less school, so what's the benefit?

Exactly. There is no benefit.

We all need to make sure our voices are heard. We need a full F2F option and a full DL option. Email the board. Submit testimony. Encourage your friends and neighbors to do the same.

There is no benefit aside from breaking the ice to get back to full F2F. You think MCPS is just going to make that leap next year without testing the waters first?

Is it really that much of a benefit though? If only half of the families want to cone back in the first place, you’ll have, on average, half the normal amount of kids in the classroom off the bat.

If the logistics can be worked out, hybrid potentially reduces class size, reduces risk by having kids in buildings fewer days, and allows teachers to develop some level of comfort that promised PPE, sanitation, and enforcement of policies like masking will be followed.

I keep seeing everyone say that hybrid is too complicated with minimal payoff. I don't see schools going face to face full time any time soon. Why doesn't anyone listen to all of the private school kids who are going to school using some hybrid model and are happy with even a few days a week in person?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

If the logistics can be worked out, hybrid potentially reduces class size, reduces risk by having kids in buildings fewer days, and allows teachers to develop some level of comfort that promised PPE, sanitation, and enforcement of policies like masking will be followed.

I keep seeing everyone say that hybrid is too complicated with minimal payoff. I don't see schools going face to face full time any time soon. Why doesn't anyone listen to all of the private school kids who are going to school using some hybrid model and are happy with even a few days a week in person?

If I can work out how to get wings, I can potentially fly.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Hybrid involves greater: expense, and risks, but involves even less school than DL. People should accept the reality of the situation and make the best of it.

Another person against the hybrid option: more complicated, higher risk, less school, so what's the benefit?

Exactly. There is no benefit.

We all need to make sure our voices are heard. We need a full F2F option and a full DL option. Email the board. Submit testimony. Encourage your friends and neighbors to do the same.

There is no benefit aside from breaking the ice to get back to full F2F. You think MCPS is just going to make that leap next year without testing the waters first?

Is it really that much of a benefit though? If only half of the families want to cone back in the first place, you’ll have, on average, half the normal amount of kids in the classroom off the bat.

If the logistics can be worked out, hybrid potentially reduces class size, reduces risk by having kids in buildings fewer days, and allows teachers to develop some level of comfort that promised PPE, sanitation, and enforcement of policies like masking will be followed.

I keep seeing everyone say that hybrid is too complicated with minimal payoff. I don't see schools going face to face full time any time soon. Why doesn't anyone listen to all of the private school kids who are going to school using some hybrid model and are happy with even a few days a week in person?

Exactly. We're going to find ourselves in the same spot next summer if interim steps aren't taken. PPE can be resourced/distributed, protocols firmed up by those planning to go back (teachers and students), and success demonstrated which will encourage more to want to return. Expecting to go from 0 to 60 (based on what we've seen so far) seems like a big stretch.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

If the logistics can be worked out, hybrid potentially reduces class size, reduces risk by having kids in buildings fewer days, and allows teachers to develop some level of comfort that promised PPE, sanitation, and enforcement of policies like masking will be followed.

I keep seeing everyone say that hybrid is too complicated with minimal payoff. I don't see schools going face to face full time any time soon. Why doesn't anyone listen to all of the private school kids who are going to school using some hybrid model and are happy with even a few days a week in person?

If I can work out how to get wings, I can potentially fly.

They need to try. Just try. Obviously, the first hurdle is transportation. However, the problem is that there is no way to assess whether than can be overcome without some proposal on the table. You can ask families whether they will need bus transportation, but if the question is asked in a vacuum, the answers won't be meaningful. Parents need to know how many days the kids would be going, what the start and finish times would be, etc. in order to give an answer. Then, if enough people say that they will drive their own kids, you can work from there to try to provide buses.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

If the logistics can be worked out, hybrid potentially reduces class size, reduces risk by having kids in buildings fewer days, and allows teachers to develop some level of comfort that promised PPE, sanitation, and enforcement of policies like masking will be followed.

I keep seeing everyone say that hybrid is too complicated with minimal payoff. I don't see schools going face to face full time any time soon. Why doesn't anyone listen to all of the private school kids who are going to school using some hybrid model and are happy with even a few days a week in person?

If I can work out how to get wings, I can potentially fly.

They need to try. Just try. Obviously, the first hurdle is transportation. However, the problem is that there is no way to assess whether than can be overcome without some proposal on the table. You can ask families whether they will need bus transportation, but if the question is asked in a vacuum, the answers won't be meaningful. Parents need to know how many days the kids would be going, what the start and finish times would be, etc. in order to give an answer. Then, if enough people say that they will drive their own kids, you can work from there to try to provide buses.

There is no need, and no reason as far as I can tell, to go to all of this trouble just for hybrid. If they're going to do it, they should do it for the real thing, i.e., a regular school day/week.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

If the logistics can be worked out, hybrid potentially reduces class size, reduces risk by having kids in buildings fewer days, and allows teachers to develop some level of comfort that promised PPE, sanitation, and enforcement of policies like masking will be followed.

I keep seeing everyone say that hybrid is too complicated with minimal payoff. I don't see schools going face to face full time any time soon. Why doesn't anyone listen to all of the private school kids who are going to school using some hybrid model and are happy with even a few days a week in person?

If I can work out how to get wings, I can potentially fly.

They need to try. Just try. Obviously, the first hurdle is transportation. However, the problem is that there is no way to assess whether than can be overcome without some proposal on the table. You can ask families whether they will need bus transportation, but if the question is asked in a vacuum, the answers won't be meaningful. Parents need to know how many days the kids would be going, what the start and finish times would be, etc. in order to give an answer. Then, if enough people say that they will drive their own kids, you can work from there to try to provide buses.

There is no need, and no reason as far as I can tell, to go to all of this trouble just for hybrid. If they're going to do it, they should do it for the real thing, i.e., a regular school day/week.

I guess you don't see the need for social distancing? That's the reason for hybrid.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

If the logistics can be worked out, hybrid potentially reduces class size, reduces risk by having kids in buildings fewer days, and allows teachers to develop some level of comfort that promised PPE, sanitation, and enforcement of policies like masking will be followed.

I keep seeing everyone say that hybrid is too complicated with minimal payoff. I don't see schools going face to face full time any time soon. Why doesn't anyone listen to all of the private school kids who are going to school using some hybrid model and are happy with even a few days a week in person?

If I can work out how to get wings, I can potentially fly.

They need to try. Just try. Obviously, the first hurdle is transportation. However, the problem is that there is no way to assess whether than can be overcome without some proposal on the table. You can ask families whether they will need bus transportation, but if the question is asked in a vacuum, the answers won't be meaningful. Parents need to know how many days the kids would be going, what the start and finish times would be, etc. in order to give an answer. Then, if enough people say that they will drive their own kids, you can work from there to try to provide buses.

There is no need, and no reason as far as I can tell, to go to all of this trouble just for hybrid. If they're going to do it, they should do it for the real thing, i.e., a regular school day/week.

I guess you don't see the need for social distancing? That's the reason for hybrid.

NP. No, there is no need for social distancing (in the sense of everybody 6 feet apart) in elementary school if you keep classes together as cohorts. Other countries have been doing it successfully without having outbreaks (individual cases yes, but no outbreaks).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

If the logistics can be worked out, hybrid potentially reduces class size, reduces risk by having kids in buildings fewer days, and allows teachers to develop some level of comfort that promised PPE, sanitation, and enforcement of policies like masking will be followed.

I keep seeing everyone say that hybrid is too complicated with minimal payoff. I don't see schools going face to face full time any time soon. Why doesn't anyone listen to all of the private school kids who are going to school using some hybrid model and are happy with even a few days a week in person?

If I can work out how to get wings, I can potentially fly.

They need to try. Just try. Obviously, the first hurdle is transportation. However, the problem is that there is no way to assess whether than can be overcome without some proposal on the table. You can ask families whether they will need bus transportation, but if the question is asked in a vacuum, the answers won't be meaningful. Parents need to know how many days the kids would be going, what the start and finish times would be, etc. in order to give an answer. Then, if enough people say that they will drive their own kids, you can work from there to try to provide buses.

There is no need, and no reason as far as I can tell, to go to all of this trouble just for hybrid. If they're going to do it, they should do it for the real thing, i.e., a regular school day/week.

I guess you don't see the need for social distancing? That's the reason for hybrid.

NP. No, there is no need for social distancing (in the sense of everybody 6 feet apart) in elementary school if you keep classes together as cohorts. Other countries have been doing it successfully without having outbreaks (individual cases yes, but no outbreaks).

Are those countries providing students with transportation that does not align with cohorts? That's where the cohort idea falls apart in my mind.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

If the logistics can be worked out, hybrid potentially reduces class size, reduces risk by having kids in buildings fewer days, and allows teachers to develop some level of comfort that promised PPE, sanitation, and enforcement of policies like masking will be followed.

I keep seeing everyone say that hybrid is too complicated with minimal payoff. I don't see schools going face to face full time any time soon. Why doesn't anyone listen to all of the private school kids who are going to school using some hybrid model and are happy with even a few days a week in person?

If I can work out how to get wings, I can potentially fly.

They need to try. Just try. Obviously, the first hurdle is transportation. However, the problem is that there is no way to assess whether than can be overcome without some proposal on the table. You can ask families whether they will need bus transportation, but if the question is asked in a vacuum, the answers won't be meaningful. Parents need to know how many days the kids would be going, what the start and finish times would be, etc. in order to give an answer. Then, if enough people say that they will drive their own kids, you can work from there to try to provide buses.

There is no need, and no reason as far as I can tell, to go to all of this trouble just for hybrid. If they're going to do it, they should do it for the real thing, i.e., a regular school day/week.

I guess you don't see the need for social distancing? That's the reason for hybrid.

Since nobody knows how many kids would even go to school if there were school, AND since people are, generally, not transmitting covid by passing each other in a hallway - no, I don't.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
I'm in favor of full F2F now, but I just don't think the MCPS leadership has the leadership capacity to pull it off now/next year without interim steps. Their inaction is always excused away with "it's too hard because they're too big...so they shouldn't even try."

Agreed. In the BOE meeting a week ago, they said they will _start_ to look for funding to upgrade HVAC systems. It's amazing they are just thinking about this now. They've had months.

Meanwhile, the Elrich admin has tens of millions of federal grant money from the CARES act they need to spend by the end of this year, and haven't figured out what to do with it:
http://www.theseventhstate.com/?p=13978

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
I'm in favor of full F2F now, but I just don't think the MCPS leadership has the leadership capacity to pull it off now/next year without interim steps. Their inaction is always excused away with "it's too hard because they're too big...so they shouldn't even try."

Agreed. In the BOE meeting a week ago, they said they will _start_ to look for funding to upgrade HVAC systems. It's amazing they are just thinking about this now. They've had months.

Meanwhile, the Elrich admin has tens of millions of federal grant money from the CARES act they need to spend by the end of this year, and haven't figured out what to do with it:
http://www.theseventhstate.com/?p=13978

Meanwhile, this is what FCPS is reporting on that topic:

"- Ensured all schools and offices have sufficient air ventilation
- Purchased initial allocation of MERV 13 filters (based on availability) and upgrading school HVAC systems where possible
- Purchased HEPA filters and air purifiers for use in select areas
- Continued review of the use of UV-C lighting in classrooms and ventilation systems and its best application
- Third-party health and safety verification for all building"