Data today 7pm

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

My kid's school has absences in the 25-50% range per class. I KNOW that is not the case at every school-- although at some schools, many more teachers are out than at hers. Even schools that feel normal-ish now, who never go over 20% absences, will be at least somewhat behind as teachers catch up kids who were out with COVID or exposed, quarantined and in a different class, etc. That's at a minimum.

As of this moment, kids have been in school for ~3.6 days since break. Surely conditions will only improve, right?

Like I said, none of this matters, because maybe (really!) you'll never have to deal with any of this! Good for you, you've earned it, by making the right choices!

You are engaged in some extreme projection here. I'm sorry your child's school is so badly impacted, but the discussion you are responding to is about how every school is different and how treated them as such is the correct policy decision.

A PP described in-person schooling using hyperbolic and flat-out untrue language that basically described prison. In response, some of us chimed in to explain that our kids were actually having a pretty normal year, other than masks. Then you came in with this rhetoric about how we are just heartless assholes, just for saying our kids actually like being back in class and doing things like cross country or in-person student government.

Why is it so triggering to you that some kids are having a pretty normal educational experience this year?

I am trying to figure this out. My kids did fine distance learning, but are much happier and more engaged in person. Essentially, from their perspective it does feel back to normal. I have noticed that there are some people who are projecting their anxiety onto their kids (I am not talking about folks on this board) and its resulting in anxious kids who do not want to be in person. This essentially creates an echo chamber and parents only see an anxious child and not their unwitting role in creating the situation. I typically see this in parents with older kids - late middle and high school.

People with older kids can read the news and look at numbers and understand how serious it is. You may not be taking covid seriously, but then you have no right to complain.

PP here. I reread my post, I can’t figure out how that could be construed as complaining. I was just offering my observations in my own life about the kids who are having anxiety issues and the correlation to their parents own anxiety about Covid.

I also cannot figure out how my post could be interpreted as not taking covid seriously. Is it the statement that my kids are happier and more engaged in person ergo I don’t think Covid is serious? I take it quite seriously, my kids haven’t been in any friends houses since 2020. They do the weekly pcp testing at school so that I can ensure they can spend time with their 70-something grandparents on a regular basis - I could go on.

None of that has anything to do with the fact that my kids and many, many others are happier in school. The default is in person school for a myriad of reasons. If that doesn’t work for some children/parents there are other options available.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:When covid first appeared someone used an image of water lilies in a pond multiplying to visualize exponential growth. I am a visual person. That image worked to me. A few cases here and there, no big deal. But as they beget more, suddenly the lake is full. The point here is, things are normal *now.* They may not stay that way.

Or, they may, for your child and your family.

But the real cost of that lies beneath the water, in places you can't see. It lies with people you don't know, will never know. The price of your child's normalcy is surging case rates, hospitals being overwhelmed, and thousands saddled with long-term suffering. I can't make you believe those people are real. That is something perhaps your own parents, or religion, or conscience should have done long ago.

We all weigh acceptable risk for ourselves and others every day we get in a car, so don't use that old chestnut as a comparison. Covid isn't driving, and omicron isn't delta. When infection rates were much lower our county was doing a good job, even with a lot of people resuming "normal" life. Now, we seem firmly committed to winnowing out the weak, the infirm, the old... Those who should take on the "responsibility" for saving themselves, apparently, even when we don't have the tools for them to do that. And all so Larla's mental health isn't impacted by not being able to run for student body president.

Despite all the purple prose above, I'm not actually a virtual forever person. I am a person who weighs risk to my family and others and makes choices accordingly. At the moment, cases are climbing exponentially at our schools. Based on the examples of other cities (namely New York) we will be where they are soon enough. I don't see the point in putting my kid into that infection chain. It's mostly a matter of conscience, not risk. And I know that seems nuts. Perhaps it is. But I was raised to follow my conscience, even when it tells me what the majority are doing isn't right, and I've tried to live that way through this virus. Do no harm, is, I think, sometimes the best we can do.

Closing schools will do nothing to change anything bolded. It just won't. I understand the desire to *do something,* but I don't understand how anyone still thinks that closing schools will control COVID. It won't. Some of the elderly and disabled will still die, hospitals will face the same burden as if schools were open. All closing schools does is stoke your feeling of moral superiority and the costs are much higher than "not getting to run for class president."

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:When covid first appeared someone used an image of water lilies in a pond multiplying to visualize exponential growth. I am a visual person. That image worked to me. A few cases here and there, no big deal. But as they beget more, suddenly the lake is full. The point here is, things are normal *now.* They may not stay that way.

Or, they may, for your child and your family.

But the real cost of that lies beneath the water, in places you can't see. It lies with people you don't know, will never know. The price of your child's normalcy is surging case rates, hospitals being overwhelmed, and thousands saddled with long-term suffering. I can't make you believe those people are real. That is something perhaps your own parents, or religion, or conscience should have done long ago.

We all weigh acceptable risk for ourselves and others every day we get in a car, so don't use that old chestnut as a comparison. Covid isn't driving, and omicron isn't delta. When infection rates were much lower our county was doing a good job, even with a lot of people resuming "normal" life. Now, we seem firmly committed to winnowing out the weak, the infirm, the old... Those who should take on the "responsibility" for saving themselves, apparently, even when we don't have the tools for them to do that. And all so Larla's mental health isn't impacted by not being able to run for student body president.

Despite all the purple prose above, I'm not actually a virtual forever person. I am a person who weighs risk to my family and others and makes choices accordingly. At the moment, cases are climbing exponentially at our schools. Based on the examples of other cities (namely New York) we will be where they are soon enough. I don't see the point in putting my kid into that infection chain. It's mostly a matter of conscience, not risk. And I know that seems nuts. Perhaps it is. But I was raised to follow my conscience, even when it tells me what the majority are doing isn't right, and I've tried to live that way through this virus. Do no harm, is, I think, sometimes the best we can do.

Closing schools will do nothing to change anything bolded. It just won't. I understand the desire to *do something,* but I don't understand how anyone still thinks that closing schools will control COVID. It won't. Some of the elderly and disabled will still die, hospitals will face the same burden as if schools were open. All closing schools does is stoke your feeling of moral superiority and the costs are much higher than "not getting to run for class president."

Are you denying Covid is spreading in schools? Our child's friend just caught it after being exposed at school both kids masked & vaccinated. The kids will be fine but what happens to the grandparent who lives in the same house. Having virtual school would have prevented this from happening, multiplying this scenario by hundreds.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:When covid first appeared someone used an image of water lilies in a pond multiplying to visualize exponential growth. I am a visual person. That image worked to me. A few cases here and there, no big deal. But as they beget more, suddenly the lake is full. The point here is, things are normal *now.* They may not stay that way.

Or, they may, for your child and your family.

But the real cost of that lies beneath the water, in places you can't see. It lies with people you don't know, will never know. The price of your child's normalcy is surging case rates, hospitals being overwhelmed, and thousands saddled with long-term suffering. I can't make you believe those people are real. That is something perhaps your own parents, or religion, or conscience should have done long ago.

We all weigh acceptable risk for ourselves and others every day we get in a car, so don't use that old chestnut as a comparison. Covid isn't driving, and omicron isn't delta. When infection rates were much lower our county was doing a good job, even with a lot of people resuming "normal" life. Now, we seem firmly committed to winnowing out the weak, the infirm, the old... Those who should take on the "responsibility" for saving themselves, apparently, even when we don't have the tools for them to do that. And all so Larla's mental health isn't impacted by not being able to run for student body president.

Despite all the purple prose above, I'm not actually a virtual forever person. I am a person who weighs risk to my family and others and makes choices accordingly. At the moment, cases are climbing exponentially at our schools. Based on the examples of other cities (namely New York) we will be where they are soon enough. I don't see the point in putting my kid into that infection chain. It's mostly a matter of conscience, not risk. And I know that seems nuts. Perhaps it is. But I was raised to follow my conscience, even when it tells me what the majority are doing isn't right, and I've tried to live that way through this virus. Do no harm, is, I think, sometimes the best we can do.

Closing schools will do nothing to change anything bolded. It just won't. I understand the desire to *do something,* but I don't understand how anyone still thinks that closing schools will control COVID. It won't. Some of the elderly and disabled will still die, hospitals will face the same burden as if schools were open. All closing schools does is stoke your feeling of moral superiority and the costs are much higher than "not getting to run for class president."

Are you denying Covid is spreading in schools? Our child's friend just caught it after being exposed at school both kids masked & vaccinated. The kids will be fine but what happens to the grandparent who lives in the same house. Having virtual school would have prevented this from happening, multiplying this scenario by hundreds.

We have to do district-wide virtual because some kids live with their grandparents?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:When covid first appeared someone used an image of water lilies in a pond multiplying to visualize exponential growth. I am a visual person. That image worked to me. A few cases here and there, no big deal. But as they beget more, suddenly the lake is full. The point here is, things are normal *now.* They may not stay that way.

Or, they may, for your child and your family.

But the real cost of that lies beneath the water, in places you can't see. It lies with people you don't know, will never know. The price of your child's normalcy is surging case rates, hospitals being overwhelmed, and thousands saddled with long-term suffering. I can't make you believe those people are real. That is something perhaps your own parents, or religion, or conscience should have done long ago.

We all weigh acceptable risk for ourselves and others every day we get in a car, so don't use that old chestnut as a comparison. Covid isn't driving, and omicron isn't delta. When infection rates were much lower our county was doing a good job, even with a lot of people resuming "normal" life. Now, we seem firmly committed to winnowing out the weak, the infirm, the old... Those who should take on the "responsibility" for saving themselves, apparently, even when we don't have the tools for them to do that. And all so Larla's mental health isn't impacted by not being able to run for student body president.

Despite all the purple prose above, I'm not actually a virtual forever person. I am a person who weighs risk to my family and others and makes choices accordingly. At the moment, cases are climbing exponentially at our schools. Based on the examples of other cities (namely New York) we will be where they are soon enough. I don't see the point in putting my kid into that infection chain. It's mostly a matter of conscience, not risk. And I know that seems nuts. Perhaps it is. But I was raised to follow my conscience, even when it tells me what the majority are doing isn't right, and I've tried to live that way through this virus. Do no harm, is, I think, sometimes the best we can do.

Closing schools will do nothing to change anything bolded. It just won't. I understand the desire to *do something,* but I don't understand how anyone still thinks that closing schools will control COVID. It won't. Some of the elderly and disabled will still die, hospitals will face the same burden as if schools were open. All closing schools does is stoke your feeling of moral superiority and the costs are much higher than "not getting to run for class president."

Are you denying Covid is spreading in schools? Our child's friend just caught it after being exposed at school both kids masked & vaccinated. The kids will be fine but what happens to the grandparent who lives in the same house. Having virtual school would have prevented this from happening, multiplying this scenario by hundreds.

I'm denying that closing schools changes the COVID numbers at a country level, yes. That's what's is and should be driving policy. A single kid catching COVID somewhere, possibly at school, doesn't change my mind on that. COVID infections are going to run rampant for the next couple weeks. That'll be true if we close schools or not.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:When covid first appeared someone used an image of water lilies in a pond multiplying to visualize exponential growth. I am a visual person. That image worked to me. A few cases here and there, no big deal. But as they beget more, suddenly the lake is full. The point here is, things are normal *now.* They may not stay that way.

Or, they may, for your child and your family.

But the real cost of that lies beneath the water, in places you can't see. It lies with people you don't know, will never know. The price of your child's normalcy is surging case rates, hospitals being overwhelmed, and thousands saddled with long-term suffering. I can't make you believe those people are real. That is something perhaps your own parents, or religion, or conscience should have done long ago.

We all weigh acceptable risk for ourselves and others every day we get in a car, so don't use that old chestnut as a comparison. Covid isn't driving, and omicron isn't delta. When infection rates were much lower our county was doing a good job, even with a lot of people resuming "normal" life. Now, we seem firmly committed to winnowing out the weak, the infirm, the old... Those who should take on the "responsibility" for saving themselves, apparently, even when we don't have the tools for them to do that. And all so Larla's mental health isn't impacted by not being able to run for student body president.

Despite all the purple prose above, I'm not actually a virtual forever person. I am a person who weighs risk to my family and others and makes choices accordingly. At the moment, cases are climbing exponentially at our schools. Based on the examples of other cities (namely New York) we will be where they are soon enough. I don't see the point in putting my kid into that infection chain. It's mostly a matter of conscience, not risk. And I know that seems nuts. Perhaps it is. But I was raised to follow my conscience, even when it tells me what the majority are doing isn't right, and I've tried to live that way through this virus. Do no harm, is, I think, sometimes the best we can do.

Closing schools will do nothing to change anything bolded. It just won't. I understand the desire to *do something,* but I don't understand how anyone still thinks that closing schools will control COVID. It won't. Some of the elderly and disabled will still die, hospitals will face the same burden as if schools were open. All closing schools does is stoke your feeling of moral superiority and the costs are much higher than "not getting to run for class president."

Are you denying Covid is spreading in schools? Our child's friend just caught it after being exposed at school both kids masked & vaccinated. The kids will be fine but what happens to the grandparent who lives in the same house. Having virtual school would have prevented this from happening, multiplying this scenario by hundreds.

I'm denying that closing schools changes the COVID numbers at a country level, yes. That's what's is and should be driving policy. A single kid catching COVID somewhere, possibly at school, doesn't change my mind on that. COVID infections are going to run rampant for the next couple weeks. That'll be true if we close schools or not.

So you're saying that the grandparent is just collateral damage? Or that it's only one grandparent? Or that the family doesn't have the right to have a safe option for educating their kid? You're saying that all multigenerational families in the county have to undergo a winnowing because, although we have the technology for them to attend school safely, you think it's too complicated to do that for a few weeks until the surge subsides?

If, as you say, COVID needs to burn through our county, don't we all have a collective obligation to protect the vulnerable while that's happening?

[Anonymous]

Lots more ##s coming I bet

[Anonymous]

So you're saying that the grandparent is just collateral damage? Or that it's only one grandparent? Or that the family doesn't have the right to have a safe option for educating their kid? You're saying that all multigenerational families in the county have to undergo a winnowing because, although we have the technology for them to attend school safely, you think it's too complicated to do that for a few weeks until the surge subsides?

If, as you say, COVID needs to burn through our county, don't we all have a collective obligation to protect the vulnerable while that's happening?

I'm not the PP, but I think that children who live with their grandparents should have access to virtual learning, and they do. Those families with special circumstances, or who just felt more comfortable in virtual learning, had that option.

That's good! I hope VA remains an option for those kids, and for kids facing bullying in schools (although I think adequate anti-bullying strategies would be even better), and for kids with chronic illnesses. Let's keep offering VA in perpetuity for kids who need it. But let's not move 150K kids to virtual just becuase some kids have special circumstances but did not avail themselves of the alternative educational options.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:When covid first appeared someone used an image of water lilies in a pond multiplying to visualize exponential growth. I am a visual person. That image worked to me. A few cases here and there, no big deal. But as they beget more, suddenly the lake is full. The point here is, things are normal *now.* They may not stay that way.

Or, they may, for your child and your family.

But the real cost of that lies beneath the water, in places you can't see. It lies with people you don't know, will never know. The price of your child's normalcy is surging case rates, hospitals being overwhelmed, and thousands saddled with long-term suffering. I can't make you believe those people are real. That is something perhaps your own parents, or religion, or conscience should have done long ago.

We all weigh acceptable risk for ourselves and others every day we get in a car, so don't use that old chestnut as a comparison. Covid isn't driving, and omicron isn't delta. When infection rates were much lower our county was doing a good job, even with a lot of people resuming "normal" life. Now, we seem firmly committed to winnowing out the weak, the infirm, the old... Those who should take on the "responsibility" for saving themselves, apparently, even when we don't have the tools for them to do that. And all so Larla's mental health isn't impacted by not being able to run for student body president.

Despite all the purple prose above, I'm not actually a virtual forever person. I am a person who weighs risk to my family and others and makes choices accordingly. At the moment, cases are climbing exponentially at our schools. Based on the examples of other cities (namely New York) we will be where they are soon enough. I don't see the point in putting my kid into that infection chain. It's mostly a matter of conscience, not risk. And I know that seems nuts. Perhaps it is. But I was raised to follow my conscience, even when it tells me what the majority are doing isn't right, and I've tried to live that way through this virus. Do no harm, is, I think, sometimes the best we can do.

Closing schools will do nothing to change anything bolded. It just won't. I understand the desire to *do something,* but I don't understand how anyone still thinks that closing schools will control COVID. It won't. Some of the elderly and disabled will still die, hospitals will face the same burden as if schools were open. All closing schools does is stoke your feeling of moral superiority and the costs are much higher than "not getting to run for class president."

Are you denying Covid is spreading in schools? Our child's friend just caught it after being exposed at school both kids masked & vaccinated. The kids will be fine but what happens to the grandparent who lives in the same house. Having virtual school would have prevented this from happening, multiplying this scenario by hundreds.

I'm denying that closing schools changes the COVID numbers at a country level, yes. That's what's is and should be driving policy. A single kid catching COVID somewhere, possibly at school, doesn't change my mind on that. COVID infections are going to run rampant for the next couple weeks. That'll be true if we close schools or not.

So you're saying that the grandparent is just collateral damage? Or that it's only one grandparent? Or that the family doesn't have the right to have a safe option for educating their kid? You're saying that all multigenerational families in the county have to undergo a winnowing because, although we have the technology for them to attend school safely, you think it's too complicated to do that for a few weeks until the surge subsides?

If, as you say, COVID needs to burn through our county, don't we all have a collective obligation to protect the vulnerable while that's happening?

So are these grandparents in your house vaccinated/boosted? If so chances are they will still be ok if they catch Covid. And are these grandparents staying home doing nothing to begin with, i.e. is their only chance for exposure through their grandkids attending school?

Anyone with a specific family situation they are worried about can keep their kids home with no absence penalty. The “virtual” for quarantined kids is pretty barebones right now anyway because there is a higher kids to teacher ratio than earlier in the fall. You’re probably not missing much.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:When covid first appeared someone used an image of water lilies in a pond multiplying to visualize exponential growth. I am a visual person. That image worked to me. A few cases here and there, no big deal. But as they beget more, suddenly the lake is full. The point here is, things are normal *now.* They may not stay that way.

Or, they may, for your child and your family.

But the real cost of that lies beneath the water, in places you can't see. It lies with people you don't know, will never know. The price of your child's normalcy is surging case rates, hospitals being overwhelmed, and thousands saddled with long-term suffering. I can't make you believe those people are real. That is something perhaps your own parents, or religion, or conscience should have done long ago.

We all weigh acceptable risk for ourselves and others every day we get in a car, so don't use that old chestnut as a comparison. Covid isn't driving, and omicron isn't delta. When infection rates were much lower our county was doing a good job, even with a lot of people resuming "normal" life. Now, we seem firmly committed to winnowing out the weak, the infirm, the old... Those who should take on the "responsibility" for saving themselves, apparently, even when we don't have the tools for them to do that. And all so Larla's mental health isn't impacted by not being able to run for student body president.

Despite all the purple prose above, I'm not actually a virtual forever person. I am a person who weighs risk to my family and others and makes choices accordingly. At the moment, cases are climbing exponentially at our schools. Based on the examples of other cities (namely New York) we will be where they are soon enough. I don't see the point in putting my kid into that infection chain. It's mostly a matter of conscience, not risk. And I know that seems nuts. Perhaps it is. But I was raised to follow my conscience, even when it tells me what the majority are doing isn't right, and I've tried to live that way through this virus. Do no harm, is, I think, sometimes the best we can do.

Closing schools will do nothing to change anything bolded. It just won't. I understand the desire to *do something,* but I don't understand how anyone still thinks that closing schools will control COVID. It won't. Some of the elderly and disabled will still die, hospitals will face the same burden as if schools were open. All closing schools does is stoke your feeling of moral superiority and the costs are much higher than "not getting to run for class president."

Are you denying Covid is spreading in schools? Our child's friend just caught it after being exposed at school both kids masked & vaccinated. The kids will be fine but what happens to the grandparent who lives in the same house. Having virtual school would have prevented this from happening, multiplying this scenario by hundreds.

I'm denying that closing schools changes the COVID numbers at a country level, yes. That's what's is and should be driving policy. A single kid catching COVID somewhere, possibly at school, doesn't change my mind on that. COVID infections are going to run rampant for the next couple weeks. That'll be true if we close schools or not.

So you're saying that the grandparent is just collateral damage? Or that it's only one grandparent? Or that the family doesn't have the right to have a safe option for educating their kid? You're saying that all multigenerational families in the county have to undergo a winnowing because, although we have the technology for them to attend school safely, you think it's too complicated to do that for a few weeks until the surge subsides?

If, as you say, COVID needs to burn through our county, don't we all have a collective obligation to protect the vulnerable while that's happening?

No, MCPS should absolutely not be going district-wide virtual. If a household feels in-person is unsafe given their circumstances, they should make alternative arrangements.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:When covid first appeared someone used an image of water lilies in a pond multiplying to visualize exponential growth. I am a visual person. That image worked to me. A few cases here and there, no big deal. But as they beget more, suddenly the lake is full. The point here is, things are normal *now.* They may not stay that way.

Or, they may, for your child and your family.

But the real cost of that lies beneath the water, in places you can't see. It lies with people you don't know, will never know. The price of your child's normalcy is surging case rates, hospitals being overwhelmed, and thousands saddled with long-term suffering. I can't make you believe those people are real. That is something perhaps your own parents, or religion, or conscience should have done long ago.

We all weigh acceptable risk for ourselves and others every day we get in a car, so don't use that old chestnut as a comparison. Covid isn't driving, and omicron isn't delta. When infection rates were much lower our county was doing a good job, even with a lot of people resuming "normal" life. Now, we seem firmly committed to winnowing out the weak, the infirm, the old... Those who should take on the "responsibility" for saving themselves, apparently, even when we don't have the tools for them to do that. And all so Larla's mental health isn't impacted by not being able to run for student body president.

Despite all the purple prose above, I'm not actually a virtual forever person. I am a person who weighs risk to my family and others and makes choices accordingly. At the moment, cases are climbing exponentially at our schools. Based on the examples of other cities (namely New York) we will be where they are soon enough. I don't see the point in putting my kid into that infection chain. It's mostly a matter of conscience, not risk. And I know that seems nuts. Perhaps it is. But I was raised to follow my conscience, even when it tells me what the majority are doing isn't right, and I've tried to live that way through this virus. Do no harm, is, I think, sometimes the best we can do.

Closing schools will do nothing to change anything bolded. It just won't. I understand the desire to *do something,* but I don't understand how anyone still thinks that closing schools will control COVID. It won't. Some of the elderly and disabled will still die, hospitals will face the same burden as if schools were open. All closing schools does is stoke your feeling of moral superiority and the costs are much higher than "not getting to run for class president."

Are you denying Covid is spreading in schools? Our child's friend just caught it after being exposed at school both kids masked & vaccinated. The kids will be fine but what happens to the grandparent who lives in the same house. Having virtual school would have prevented this from happening, multiplying this scenario by hundreds.

I'm denying that closing schools changes the COVID numbers at a country level, yes. That's what's is and should be driving policy. A single kid catching COVID somewhere, possibly at school, doesn't change my mind on that. COVID infections are going to run rampant for the next couple weeks. That'll be true if we close schools or not.

So you're saying that the grandparent is just collateral damage? Or that it's only one grandparent? Or that the family doesn't have the right to have a safe option for educating their kid? You're saying that all multigenerational families in the county have to undergo a winnowing because, although we have the technology for them to attend school safely, you think it's too complicated to do that for a few weeks until the surge subsides?

If, as you say, COVID needs to burn through our county, don't we all have a collective obligation to protect the vulnerable while that's happening?

First let's dispense with the idea that parents don't have options. They do. There's currently no obligation to attend school. Families that aren't or don't feel safe are free not to expose themselves to school. The fact that, at my school which has a lot of multigenerational households, more kids are in person now than ever attended virtually tells me that they're not feeling as unsafe as you think. I trust those parents to make a choice for themselves, which they currently have.

Second, you're really missing the point. If I thought that closing school would meaningfully effect case numbers, I'd support it, but the evidence isn't there. The choices aren't "schools open, old people die" or "schools closed, old people live." The choices are schools open or closed, either way COVID rampages through the community without any meaningful checks on spread. It's not protecting the vulnerable to close schools, because they vulnerable will have the same risk no matter what do do. It's a feel good measure, not meaningful.

[Anonymous]

Whether you want in person learning or virtual, the reality is that we need to learn to live with Covid. It mutates and this time the mutation works around the vaccinations like the flu does some years. Those with vaccinations and boosters fair pretty well and can return after 5 days based on CDC guidance provided that a person remains masked.

MCPS needs to build contingency plans into the school calendar for spikes in infections. They should be looking ahead and planning for FY 23 so they aren’t in the same boat next year.

Staff might need more mental health support because it is scary and stressful with the demands when a school is short staff for long periods of time.

Most importantly, how is all the chaos affecting learning and students? Should the end of the second quarter be extended?

Education should be built around teaching students what they need to know in a manner that is safe for staff and students. If the ability to teach students is jeopardized by extreme staffing shortages, shouldn’t the system be flexible enough to pause, let staff heal, and come back with school when the rates go down? Contracts should not be driving policy in a national health emergency. With all the lawyers MCPS pays, don’t they have clauses in the contracts to allow flexibility?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Whether you want in person learning or virtual, the reality is that we need to learn to live with Covid. It mutates and this time the mutation works around the vaccinations like the flu does some years. Those with vaccinations and boosters fair pretty well and can return after 5 days based on CDC guidance provided that a person remains masked.

MCPS needs to build contingency plans into the school calendar for spikes in infections. They should be looking ahead and planning for FY 23 so they aren’t in the same boat next year.

Staff might need more mental health support because it is scary and stressful with the demands when a school is short staff for long periods of time.

Most importantly, how is all the chaos affecting learning and students? Should the end of the second quarter be extended?

Education should be built around teaching students what they need to know in a manner that is safe for staff and students. If the ability to teach students is jeopardized by extreme staffing shortages, shouldn’t the system be flexible enough to pause, let staff heal, and come back with school when the rates go down? Contracts should not be driving policy in a national health emergency. With all the lawyers MCPS pays, don’t they have clauses in the contracts to allow flexibility?

This is sensible advice.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:When covid first appeared someone used an image of water lilies in a pond multiplying to visualize exponential growth. I am a visual person. That image worked to me. A few cases here and there, no big deal. But as they beget more, suddenly the lake is full. The point here is, things are normal *now.* They may not stay that way.

Or, they may, for your child and your family.

But the real cost of that lies beneath the water, in places you can't see. It lies with people you don't know, will never know. The price of your child's normalcy is surging case rates, hospitals being overwhelmed, and thousands saddled with long-term suffering. I can't make you believe those people are real. That is something perhaps your own parents, or religion, or conscience should have done long ago.

We all weigh acceptable risk for ourselves and others every day we get in a car, so don't use that old chestnut as a comparison. Covid isn't driving, and omicron isn't delta. When infection rates were much lower our county was doing a good job, even with a lot of people resuming "normal" life. Now, we seem firmly committed to winnowing out the weak, the infirm, the old... Those who should take on the "responsibility" for saving themselves, apparently, even when we don't have the tools for them to do that. And all so Larla's mental health isn't impacted by not being able to run for student body president.

Despite all the purple prose above, I'm not actually a virtual forever person. I am a person who weighs risk to my family and others and makes choices accordingly. At the moment, cases are climbing exponentially at our schools. Based on the examples of other cities (namely New York) we will be where they are soon enough. I don't see the point in putting my kid into that infection chain. It's mostly a matter of conscience, not risk. And I know that seems nuts. Perhaps it is. But I was raised to follow my conscience, even when it tells me what the majority are doing isn't right, and I've tried to live that way through this virus. Do no harm, is, I think, sometimes the best we can do.

Closing schools will do nothing to change anything bolded. It just won't. I understand the desire to *do something,* but I don't understand how anyone still thinks that closing schools will control COVID. It won't. Some of the elderly and disabled will still die, hospitals will face the same burden as if schools were open. All closing schools does is stoke your feeling of moral superiority and the costs are much higher than "not getting to run for class president."

Are you denying Covid is spreading in schools? Our child's friend just caught it after being exposed at school both kids masked & vaccinated. The kids will be fine but what happens to the grandparent who lives in the same house. Having virtual school would have prevented this from happening, multiplying this scenario by hundreds.

We have to do district-wide virtual because some kids live with their grandparents?

That question is the heart of all this. Do we have to have district wide virtual because some people live with the frail, the elderly, the immunocompromised?
IMO, there has to be a virtual OPTION from here on out, to protect those people, and those families, but for most kids, in-person works better.
You can't destabilize the entire system requesting virtual because a new variant is on the loose that will not cause great harm to vaccinated healthy people. We live with practical concerns, like staffing shortages. You know your risk, your own family's health issues; choose accordingly when VA opens up again.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:When covid first appeared someone used an image of water lilies in a pond multiplying to visualize exponential growth. I am a visual person. That image worked to me. A few cases here and there, no big deal. But as they beget more, suddenly the lake is full. The point here is, things are normal *now.* They may not stay that way.

Or, they may, for your child and your family.

But the real cost of that lies beneath the water, in places you can't see. It lies with people you don't know, will never know. The price of your child's normalcy is surging case rates, hospitals being overwhelmed, and thousands saddled with long-term suffering. I can't make you believe those people are real. That is something perhaps your own parents, or religion, or conscience should have done long ago.

We all weigh acceptable risk for ourselves and others every day we get in a car, so don't use that old chestnut as a comparison. Covid isn't driving, and omicron isn't delta. When infection rates were much lower our county was doing a good job, even with a lot of people resuming "normal" life. Now, we seem firmly committed to winnowing out the weak, the infirm, the old... Those who should take on the "responsibility" for saving themselves, apparently, even when we don't have the tools for them to do that. And all so Larla's mental health isn't impacted by not being able to run for student body president.

Despite all the purple prose above, I'm not actually a virtual forever person. I am a person who weighs risk to my family and others and makes choices accordingly. At the moment, cases are climbing exponentially at our schools. Based on the examples of other cities (namely New York) we will be where they are soon enough. I don't see the point in putting my kid into that infection chain. It's mostly a matter of conscience, not risk. And I know that seems nuts. Perhaps it is. But I was raised to follow my conscience, even when it tells me what the majority are doing isn't right, and I've tried to live that way through this virus. Do no harm, is, I think, sometimes the best we can do.

Closing schools will do nothing to change anything bolded. It just won't. I understand the desire to *do something,* but I don't understand how anyone still thinks that closing schools will control COVID. It won't. Some of the elderly and disabled will still die, hospitals will face the same burden as if schools were open. All closing schools does is stoke your feeling of moral superiority and the costs are much higher than "not getting to run for class president."

Are you denying Covid is spreading in schools? Our child's friend just caught it after being exposed at school both kids masked & vaccinated. The kids will be fine but what happens to the grandparent who lives in the same house. Having virtual school would have prevented this from happening, multiplying this scenario by hundreds.

We have to do district-wide virtual because some kids live with their grandparents?

That question is the heart of all this. Do we have to have district wide virtual because some people live with the frail, the elderly, the immunocompromised?
IMO, there has to be a virtual OPTION from here on out, to protect those people, and those families, but for most kids, in-person works better.
You can't destabilize the entire system requesting virtual because a new variant is on the loose that will not cause great harm to vaccinated healthy people. We live with practical concerns, like staffing shortages. You know your risk, your own family's health issues; choose accordingly when VA opens up again.

The issue is that right now we have crossed the threshold/level of risk that many of people are comfortable with taking.
Many arguing for virtual right now are not those with immunocompromised family members, they already choose the VA.
Instead it's people who don't feel the elevated risk of getting Covid when transmission is high is worth going to school with substitutes and many missing classmates. The chaos or potential for chaos and the uncertainties-- will my bus driver be out, will my teacher be out, will my friends be there, will I get Covid-- are causing anxiety and unproductive learning environments.
Many feel that more consistency and certainty could be provided through a few weeks of virtual while the surge passes. And that at the end of two to three weeks of virtual, students and teachers would be better able to pick up and move forward quickly with less time catching people up and fewer disruptions.