Smart Restart APS- ventilation studies

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Even if we are talking about 100 kids in the cafeteria at a time plus staff, we are talking about the cafeteria being at about 20% capacity at any given time, which is very low capacity utilization for safety purposes. I can understand why some aren’t comfortable going back and I won’t argue with your choice to stay virtual, but it’s not a reason not to reopen for those who are comfortable with those mitigation measures.

You keep saying “it’s not a reason not to reopen” but no one is arguing it is. They are arguing that there should be an outdoor option so families not comfortable with the all-grade level indoor group lunches can have the same opportunity to send their kids to hybrid as those who don’t care.

I'm comfortable with the current situation. There needs to be some level of risk taken.

There “needs” to be risk taken? No, we don’t need to add risk unnecessarily. If there is an outdoor option, take it. Or find another solution that works. Maybe all kids eat in period 5 to reduce the exposure to larger groups.

We don’t “need” to autonomically just go with the riskiest option.

Yes, it sounds like a very smart idea to plan for hybrid kids to have to eat their meals during a class session, thereby distracting them from the teaching going on. Clearly education is a priority for you.

LOL. Yes, if kids are eating they certainly can’t learn. I’ll let my kids know that they aren’t learning anything since they eat breakfast and sometimes lunch during class now.

Or.......the schools can build in a lunch window extending period 5 so kids can eat there after the class has ended.

God forbid we try to do anything to reduce risk. WTF is wrong with you people?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Even if we are talking about 100 kids in the cafeteria at a time plus staff, we are talking about the cafeteria being at about 20% capacity at any given time, which is very low capacity utilization for safety purposes. I can understand why some aren’t comfortable going back and I won’t argue with your choice to stay virtual, but it’s not a reason not to reopen for those who are comfortable with those mitigation measures.

You keep saying “it’s not a reason not to reopen” but no one is arguing it is. They are arguing that there should be an outdoor option so families not comfortable with the all-grade level indoor group lunches can have the same opportunity to send their kids to hybrid as those who don’t care.

I'm comfortable with the current situation. There needs to be some level of risk taken.

There “needs” to be risk taken? No, we don’t need to add risk unnecessarily. If there is an outdoor option, take it. Or find another solution that works. Maybe all kids eat in period 5 to reduce the exposure to larger groups.

We don’t “need” to autonomically just go with the riskiest option.

Yes, it sounds like a very smart idea to plan for hybrid kids to have to eat their meals during a class session, thereby distracting them from the teaching going on. Clearly education is a priority for you.

LOL. Yes, if kids are eating they certainly can’t learn. I’ll let my kids know that they aren’t learning anything since they eat breakfast and sometimes lunch during class now.

Or.......the schools can build in a lunch window extending period 5 so kids can eat there after the class has ended.

God forbid we try to do anything to reduce risk. WTF is wrong with you people?

Some of these solutions seem simple, but there are staffing issues at play. What adult is in all of these classrooms during lunch?

Outdoor lunch sounds great to me. Classroom lunch sounds reasonable to me. The schools have to make the determinations about what is actually doable, though. “We” aren’t the ones who can do that.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Even if we are talking about 100 kids in the cafeteria at a time plus staff, we are talking about the cafeteria being at about 20% capacity at any given time, which is very low capacity utilization for safety purposes. I can understand why some aren’t comfortable going back and I won’t argue with your choice to stay virtual, but it’s not a reason not to reopen for those who are comfortable with those mitigation measures.

You keep saying “it’s not a reason not to reopen” but no one is arguing it is. They are arguing that there should be an outdoor option so families not comfortable with the all-grade level indoor group lunches can have the same opportunity to send their kids to hybrid as those who don’t care.

I'm comfortable with the current situation. There needs to be some level of risk taken.

There “needs” to be risk taken? No, we don’t need to add risk unnecessarily. If there is an outdoor option, take it. Or find another solution that works. Maybe all kids eat in period 5 to reduce the exposure to larger groups.

We don’t “need” to autonomically just go with the riskiest option.

Yes, it sounds like a very smart idea to plan for hybrid kids to have to eat their meals during a class session, thereby distracting them from the teaching going on. Clearly education is a priority for you.

These are 12 -14 year old not 5 year olds. They sit and eat snack all day in virtual school. LOL.

[Anonymous]

The fact is you have KMS which is saying outdoor and indoor are both options. You have WMS balking on outdoor. They both have sufficient outdoor space so thats not a limitation for WMS. Why can one figure it out but the other is pushing back?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Even if we are talking about 100 kids in the cafeteria at a time plus staff, we are talking about the cafeteria being at about 20% capacity at any given time, which is very low capacity utilization for safety purposes. I can understand why some aren’t comfortable going back and I won’t argue with your choice to stay virtual, but it’s not a reason not to reopen for those who are comfortable with those mitigation measures.

You keep saying “it’s not a reason not to reopen” but no one is arguing it is. They are arguing that there should be an outdoor option so families not comfortable with the all-grade level indoor group lunches can have the same opportunity to send their kids to hybrid as those who don’t care.

I'm comfortable with the current situation. There needs to be some level of risk taken.

There “needs” to be risk taken? No, we don’t need to add risk unnecessarily. If there is an outdoor option, take it. Or find another solution that works. Maybe all kids eat in period 5 to reduce the exposure to larger groups.

We don’t “need” to autonomically just go with the riskiest option.

Yes, it sounds like a very smart idea to plan for hybrid kids to have to eat their meals during a class session, thereby distracting them from the teaching going on. Clearly education is a priority for you.

LOL. Yes, if kids are eating they certainly can’t learn. I’ll let my kids know that they aren’t learning anything since they eat breakfast and sometimes lunch during class now.

Or.......the schools can build in a lunch window extending period 5 so kids can eat there after the class has ended.

God forbid we try to do anything to reduce risk. WTF is wrong with you people?

Some kids would find it very distracting to eat while class is going on, but since they're not your kids I guess they don't matter.

They looked into using the classrooms for meals, but it wasn't workable because (1) some of those classrooms are needed for other classes during that time period (remember that the grades all eat at different times, so you can't just extend lunch periods without completely throwing schedules out of whack); and (2) they don't have enough staffing to cover every classroom while students eat while also allowing teachers to have their lunch/prep periods.

I am in favor of reducing risk, but we need to consider all of the consequences of a given measure.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The fact is you have KMS which is saying outdoor and indoor are both options. You have WMS balking on outdoor. They both have sufficient outdoor space so thats not a limitation for WMS. Why can one figure it out but the other is pushing back?

I guess Kenmore must have gotten funding other schools didn't to purchase outdoor shelters and hire additional staff to guarantee outdoor lunch options.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The fact is you have KMS which is saying outdoor and indoor are both options. You have WMS balking on outdoor. They both have sufficient outdoor space so thats not a limitation for WMS. Why can one figure it out but the other is pushing back?

Could be staffing issues, could be differences in communication. Maybe WMS admin doesn’t want to give people the impression that kids will routinely be eating lunch outside when they don’t know what the kids will choose to do. Saying that there will be plenty of outdoor space for lunch but finding that in reality few kids choose that option most days could come back to bite them.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The fact is you have KMS which is saying outdoor and indoor are both options. You have WMS balking on outdoor. They both have sufficient outdoor space so thats not a limitation for WMS. Why can one figure it out but the other is pushing back?

Could be staffing issues, could be differences in communication. Maybe WMS admin doesn’t want to give people the impression that kids will routinely be eating lunch outside when they don’t know what the kids will choose to do. Saying that there will be plenty of outdoor space for lunch but finding that in reality few kids choose that option most days could come back to bite them.

+1. I would rather be pleasantly surprised when my kid has more opportunities for outdoor lunch than upset if I sent them back based on an expectation of outdoor lunch that ends up happening infrequently in practice.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The fact is you have KMS which is saying outdoor and indoor are both options. You have WMS balking on outdoor. They both have sufficient outdoor space so thats not a limitation for WMS. Why can one figure it out but the other is pushing back?

Probably numbers. Given the feeder elementaries, I’ll wager Kenmore’s under 50% hybrid. WMS has said they are close to 70%.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Even if we are talking about 100 kids in the cafeteria at a time plus staff, we are talking about the cafeteria being at about 20% capacity at any given time, which is very low capacity utilization for safety purposes. I can understand why some aren’t comfortable going back and I won’t argue with your choice to stay virtual, but it’s not a reason not to reopen for those who are comfortable with those mitigation measures.

You keep saying “it’s not a reason not to reopen” but no one is arguing it is. They are arguing that there should be an outdoor option so families not comfortable with the all-grade level indoor group lunches can have the same opportunity to send their kids to hybrid as those who don’t care.

I'm comfortable with the current situation. There needs to be some level of risk taken.

There “needs” to be risk taken? No, we don’t need to add risk unnecessarily. If there is an outdoor option, take it. Or find another solution that works. Maybe all kids eat in period 5 to reduce the exposure to larger groups.

We don’t “need” to autonomically just go with the riskiest option.

Yes, it sounds like a very smart idea to plan for hybrid kids to have to eat their meals during a class session, thereby distracting them from the teaching going on. Clearly education is a priority for you.

These are 12 -14 year old not 5 year olds. They sit and eat snack all day in virtual school. LOL.

Mine doesn’t.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The fact is you have KMS which is saying outdoor and indoor are both options. You have WMS balking on outdoor. They both have sufficient outdoor space so thats not a limitation for WMS. Why can one figure it out but the other is pushing back?

Probably numbers. Given the feeder elementaries, I’ll wager Kenmore’s under 50% hybrid. WMS has said they are close to 70%.

I think this is probably the answer.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Even if we are talking about 100 kids in the cafeteria at a time plus staff, we are talking about the cafeteria being at about 20% capacity at any given time, which is very low capacity utilization for safety purposes. I can understand why some aren’t comfortable going back and I won’t argue with your choice to stay virtual, but it’s not a reason not to reopen for those who are comfortable with those mitigation measures.

You keep saying “it’s not a reason not to reopen” but no one is arguing it is. They are arguing that there should be an outdoor option so families not comfortable with the all-grade level indoor group lunches can have the same opportunity to send their kids to hybrid as those who don’t care.

I'm comfortable with the current situation. There needs to be some level of risk taken.

There “needs” to be risk taken? No, we don’t need to add risk unnecessarily. If there is an outdoor option, take it. Or find another solution that works. Maybe all kids eat in period 5 to reduce the exposure to larger groups.

We don’t “need” to autonomically just go with the riskiest option.

Yes, it sounds like a very smart idea to plan for hybrid kids to have to eat their meals during a class session, thereby distracting them from the teaching going on. Clearly education is a priority for you.

LOL. Yes, if kids are eating they certainly can’t learn. I’ll let my kids know that they aren’t learning anything since they eat breakfast and sometimes lunch during class now.

Or.......the schools can build in a lunch window extending period 5 so kids can eat there after the class has ended.

God forbid we try to do anything to reduce risk. WTF is wrong with you people?

Some of these solutions seem simple, but there are staffing issues at play. What adult is in all of these classrooms during lunch?

Outdoor lunch sounds great to me. Classroom lunch sounds reasonable to me. The schools have to make the determinations about what is actually doable, though. “We” aren’t the ones who can do that.

I’d say one of the many fully vaccinated staff members.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Even if we are talking about 100 kids in the cafeteria at a time plus staff, we are talking about the cafeteria being at about 20% capacity at any given time, which is very low capacity utilization for safety purposes. I can understand why some aren’t comfortable going back and I won’t argue with your choice to stay virtual, but it’s not a reason not to reopen for those who are comfortable with those mitigation measures.

You keep saying “it’s not a reason not to reopen” but no one is arguing it is. They are arguing that there should be an outdoor option so families not comfortable with the all-grade level indoor group lunches can have the same opportunity to send their kids to hybrid as those who don’t care.

I'm comfortable with the current situation. There needs to be some level of risk taken.

There “needs” to be risk taken? No, we don’t need to add risk unnecessarily. If there is an outdoor option, take it. Or find another solution that works. Maybe all kids eat in period 5 to reduce the exposure to larger groups.

We don’t “need” to autonomically just go with the riskiest option.

Yes, it sounds like a very smart idea to plan for hybrid kids to have to eat their meals during a class session, thereby distracting them from the teaching going on. Clearly education is a priority for you.

LOL. Yes, if kids are eating they certainly can’t learn. I’ll let my kids know that they aren’t learning anything since they eat breakfast and sometimes lunch during class now.

Or.......the schools can build in a lunch window extending period 5 so kids can eat there after the class has ended.

God forbid we try to do anything to reduce risk. WTF is wrong with you people?

Some of these solutions seem simple, but there are staffing issues at play. What adult is in all of these classrooms during lunch?

Outdoor lunch sounds great to me. Classroom lunch sounds reasonable to me. The schools have to make the determinations about what is actually doable, though. “We” aren’t the ones who can do that.

I’d say one of the many fully vaccinated staff members.

One fully vaccinated staff member is assigned to one classroom for the students’ lunch period? How many classrooms would that be? More than a few, I’d wager. So what classrooms are used for instruction for group B or C while group A is having lunch? Which teachers teach those classes while a large number are overseeing group A’s lunch period? When do the teachers have a lunch break?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Even if we are talking about 100 kids in the cafeteria at a time plus staff, we are talking about the cafeteria being at about 20% capacity at any given time, which is very low capacity utilization for safety purposes. I can understand why some aren’t comfortable going back and I won’t argue with your choice to stay virtual, but it’s not a reason not to reopen for those who are comfortable with those mitigation measures.

You keep saying “it’s not a reason not to reopen” but no one is arguing it is. They are arguing that there should be an outdoor option so families not comfortable with the all-grade level indoor group lunches can have the same opportunity to send their kids to hybrid as those who don’t care.

I'm comfortable with the current situation. There needs to be some level of risk taken.

There “needs” to be risk taken? No, we don’t need to add risk unnecessarily. If there is an outdoor option, take it. Or find another solution that works. Maybe all kids eat in period 5 to reduce the exposure to larger groups.

We don’t “need” to autonomically just go with the riskiest option.

Yes, it sounds like a very smart idea to plan for hybrid kids to have to eat their meals during a class session, thereby distracting them from the teaching going on. Clearly education is a priority for you.

These are 12 -14 year old not 5 year olds. They sit and eat snack all day in virtual school. LOL.

Mine doesn’t.

Better keep them home.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Even if we are talking about 100 kids in the cafeteria at a time plus staff, we are talking about the cafeteria being at about 20% capacity at any given time, which is very low capacity utilization for safety purposes. I can understand why some aren’t comfortable going back and I won’t argue with your choice to stay virtual, but it’s not a reason not to reopen for those who are comfortable with those mitigation measures.

You keep saying “it’s not a reason not to reopen” but no one is arguing it is. They are arguing that there should be an outdoor option so families not comfortable with the all-grade level indoor group lunches can have the same opportunity to send their kids to hybrid as those who don’t care.

I'm comfortable with the current situation. There needs to be some level of risk taken.

There “needs” to be risk taken? No, we don’t need to add risk unnecessarily. If there is an outdoor option, take it. Or find another solution that works. Maybe all kids eat in period 5 to reduce the exposure to larger groups.

We don’t “need” to autonomically just go with the riskiest option.

Yes, it sounds like a very smart idea to plan for hybrid kids to have to eat their meals during a class session, thereby distracting them from the teaching going on. Clearly education is a priority for you.

These are 12 -14 year old not 5 year olds. They sit and eat snack all day in virtual school. LOL.

Mine doesn’t.

Better keep them home.

Nope, they're headed in for hybrid, because the APS plan suits them just fine.