Covid at SFS

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I see comments above referring to a SFS Dashboard with COVID cases....

Can anyone give me tips on where I can find that in the Parent Portal section of the website? I just spent 10 minutes and I can't even find an easy link to anything COVID related (which is kind of crazy...but...). Whenever I want to do something COVID-related, I always have to go back to specific email communication from Mamadou or Jasmine and use their direct links.

Login, then once in the Parent Portal, click the green button on the right called "Fall 2020 FAQs, Videos and More." After that click the first icon ("Testing Dashboard and Information") (to the left of the "Medical Advisory Team").

Thanks SOOO much! (and to other PP who helped)

A scavenger hunt indeed! It would help alot if COVID was listed somewhere in that box

[Anonymous]

^^^^^

"a lot" and "Fall 2020 box"

[Anonymous]

Back to the original post - I do think it would be more transparent if SFS announced all cases of on-campus individuals (admin, faculty, contractors, students) to the entire community, with no identifying detail other than division, date of positive test, and last date on campus. Our other child's K-8 does this, and then individuals with high potential for direct exposure receive additional communication. My very large office building does this too.

There is no expectation that there will be zero cases, but that when there are cases, the response is appropriate. Being transparent, while maintaining confidentiality shows good leadership. Communication is key to both comfort and compliance.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Back to the original post - I do think it would be more transparent if SFS announced all cases of on-campus individuals (admin, faculty, contractors, students) to the entire community, with no identifying detail other than division, date of positive test, and last date on campus. Our other child's K-8 does this, and then individuals with high potential for direct exposure receive additional communication. My very large office building does this too.

There is no expectation that there will be zero cases, but that when there are cases, the response is appropriate. Being transparent, while maintaining confidentiality shows good leadership. Communication is key to both comfort and compliance.

Before hybrid learning started again at the US, they shared that info when a Meriwether Godsey employee was diagnosed with covid. I assumed that they would do something similar in the future -- but apparently not.

The two biggest issues for me with Sidwell's plans are 1) that the definition of "close contact" for notifying those who came in contact with an infected person is insufficient; it doesn't require telling students who are in the same class with infected students, because they are 6 feet apart and wearing masks. But in reality spending 80 minutes in the same room with an infected person is a risk no matter what PPE is used or what air filtration. And 2), the US does not have cohorts at all -- students attend their normal classes, and teachers teach multiple different classes. You mix with whatever group of people that your schedule implies, and teachers are a common contact between groups. I was really put off with the tone of the email announcing a return to hybrid learning -- it was essentially, "Guess what, guys! We found out we don't have to comply with public health orders! Dude!"

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Can anyone give me tips on where I can find that in the Parent Portal section of the website?

sidwell.edu/fall2020, first giant icon.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Back to the original post - I do think it would be more transparent if SFS announced all cases of on-campus individuals (admin, faculty, contractors, students) to the entire community, with no identifying detail other than division, date of positive test, and last date on campus. Our other child's K-8 does this, and then individuals with high potential for direct exposure receive additional communication. My very large office building does this too.

There is no expectation that there will be zero cases, but that when there are cases, the response is appropriate. Being transparent, while maintaining confidentiality shows good leadership. Communication is key to both comfort and compliance.

Before hybrid learning started again at the US, they shared that info when a Meriwether Godsey employee was diagnosed with covid. I assumed that they would do something similar in the future -- but apparently not.

The two biggest issues for me with Sidwell's plans are 1) that the definition of "close contact" for notifying those who came in contact with an infected person is insufficient; it doesn't require telling students who are in the same class with infected students, because they are 6 feet apart and wearing masks. But in reality spending 80 minutes in the same room with an infected person is a risk no matter what PPE is used or what air filtration. And 2), the US does not have cohorts at all -- students attend their normal classes, and teachers teach multiple different classes. You mix with whatever group of people that your schedule implies, and teachers are a common contact between groups. I was really put off with the tone of the email announcing a return to hybrid learning -- it was essentially, "Guess what, guys! We found out we don't have to comply with public health orders! Dude!"

Yet there are parents who want to push for even more as evidenced by the email last night. It seems that some parents are ok with rising cases.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Back to the original post - I do think it would be more transparent if SFS announced all cases of on-campus individuals (admin, faculty, contractors, students) to the entire community, with no identifying detail other than division, date of positive test, and last date on campus. Our other child's K-8 does this, and then individuals with high potential for direct exposure receive additional communication. My very large office building does this too.

There is no expectation that there will be zero cases, but that when there are cases, the response is appropriate. Being transparent, while maintaining confidentiality shows good leadership. Communication is key to both comfort and compliance.

Before hybrid learning started again at the US, they shared that info when a Meriwether Godsey employee was diagnosed with covid. I assumed that they would do something similar in the future -- but apparently not.

The two biggest issues for me with Sidwell's plans are 1) that the definition of "close contact" for notifying those who came in contact with an infected person is insufficient; it doesn't require telling students who are in the same class with infected students, because they are 6 feet apart and wearing masks. But in reality spending 80 minutes in the same room with an infected person is a risk no matter what PPE is used or what air filtration. And 2), the US does not have cohorts at all -- students attend their normal classes, and teachers teach multiple different classes. You mix with whatever group of people that your schedule implies, and teachers are a common contact between groups. I was really put off with the tone of the email announcing a return to hybrid learning -- it was essentially, "Guess what, guys! We found out we don't have to comply with public health orders! Dude!"

Yet there are parents who want to push for even more as evidenced by the email last night. It seems that some parents are ok with rising cases.

Last time the squeaky wheel approach worked, so if you don't agree with the email - you might want to reach out to let the school know.

[Anonymous]

If you don't agree with the email, then let your kid DL for the duration.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:If you don't agree with the email, then let your kid DL for the duration.

You sound like another entitled parent

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If you don't agree with the email, then let your kid DL for the duration.

You sound like another entitled parent

No. It is reality. My kids will be home and DLing as per the original calendar. If others want to try to have their kids in person for two weeks in December and the school wants to adjust the policy accordingly, I am fine with it. Doesn't impact me either way.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If you don't agree with the email, then let your kid DL for the duration.

You sound like another entitled parent

what is entitled about this? if you don't want your kid to go, then DL; if the metrics are such that it possible to do hybrid, why not let them do hybrid?

[Anonymous]

the dashboard is good, transparent and tells us the extremely conservative metrics set by the school and the medical advisory team are being met. the testing and safety protocols are working.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Back to the original post - I do think it would be more transparent if SFS announced all cases of on-campus individuals (admin, faculty, contractors, students) to the entire community, with no identifying detail other than division, date of positive test, and last date on campus. Our other child's K-8 does this, and then individuals with high potential for direct exposure receive additional communication. My very large office building does this too.

There is no expectation that there will be zero cases, but that when there are cases, the response is appropriate. Being transparent, while maintaining confidentiality shows good leadership. Communication is key to both comfort and compliance.

Before hybrid learning started again at the US, they shared that info when a Meriwether Godsey employee was diagnosed with covid. I assumed that they would do something similar in the future -- but apparently not.

The two biggest issues for me with Sidwell's plans are 1) that the definition of "close contact" for notifying those who came in contact with an infected person is insufficient; it doesn't require telling students who are in the same class with infected students, because they are 6 feet apart and wearing masks. But in reality spending 80 minutes in the same room with an infected person is a risk no matter what PPE is used or what air filtration. And 2), the US does not have cohorts at all -- students attend their normal classes, and teachers teach multiple different classes. You mix with whatever group of people that your schedule implies, and teachers are a common contact between groups. I was really put off with the tone of the email announcing a return to hybrid learning -- it was essentially, "Guess what, guys! We found out we don't have to comply with public health orders! Dude!"

Yet there are parents who want to push for even more as evidenced by the email last night. It seems that some parents are ok with rising cases.

Last time the squeaky wheel approach worked, so if you don't agree with the email - you might want to reach out to let the school know.

The email was offensive. The parents behind it harvested email addresses from the school directory, in violation of school policy, and then spammed everyone. There is a small cabal of Karens who think they know better than epidemiologists, infections disease experts and an administrator from the top COVD hospital in DC.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Back to the original post - I do think it would be more transparent if SFS announced all cases of on-campus individuals (admin, faculty, contractors, students) to the entire community, with no identifying detail other than division, date of positive test, and last date on campus. Our other child's K-8 does this, and then individuals with high potential for direct exposure receive additional communication. My very large office building does this too.

There is no expectation that there will be zero cases, but that when there are cases, the response is appropriate. Being transparent, while maintaining confidentiality shows good leadership. Communication is key to both comfort and compliance.

Before hybrid learning started again at the US, they shared that info when a Meriwether Godsey employee was diagnosed with covid. I assumed that they would do something similar in the future -- but apparently not.

The two biggest issues for me with Sidwell's plans are 1) that the definition of "close contact" for notifying those who came in contact with an infected person is insufficient; it doesn't require telling students who are in the same class with infected students, because they are 6 feet apart and wearing masks. But in reality spending 80 minutes in the same room with an infected person is a risk no matter what PPE is used or what air filtration. And 2), the US does not have cohorts at all -- students attend their normal classes, and teachers teach multiple different classes. You mix with whatever group of people that your schedule implies, and teachers are a common contact between groups. I was really put off with the tone of the email announcing a return to hybrid learning -- it was essentially, "Guess what, guys! We found out we don't have to comply with public health orders! Dude!"

Yet there are parents who want to push for even more as evidenced by the email last night. It seems that some parents are ok with rising cases.

Last time the squeaky wheel approach worked, so if you don't agree with the email - you might want to reach out to let the school know.

The email was offensive. The parents behind it harvested email addresses from the school directory, in violation of school policy, and then spammed everyone. There is a small cabal of Karens who think they know better than epidemiologists, infections disease experts and an administrator from the top COVD hospital in DC.

+100

[Anonymous]

Easy to ignore it, that's what I did.

They didn't have the courage to sign with their names and are suggesting people can sign anonymously. That isn't how to make a persuasive argument.