Petition - MCPS: Do Not Change Metrics

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Funny how it says "Responsible Citizen" started the petition, and they don't actually put their real name on it.

I wonder why...

Because we all know, cough cough... it’s a really a lazy teacher enjoying her home.

Or, even worse,

It's somebody who has a financial incentive for continued distance learning. Somebody that profits from kids staying at home

Who profits from kids staying at home? Zoom?

People that started private, for-profit tutoring businesses in the area back in the spring. People that built a platform to recruit tutors and connect them with families

And are now advocating for continued distance learning. Because distance learning results in more need for their service

How big of a population can this group of people be? My thinking it’s the teachers and teachers union protecting* the teachers not the students.

How about the fact that tons of teachers are tutoring for profit, including during what would otherwise be school hours? It's a great deal for them - same pay as pre-pandemic for much less work, and lots of free time for shaking down parents for tutoring. I was one of the seemingly few defenders of MCPS on this site before Covid. Now I'm totally disgusted.

How exactly are teachers shaking down parents for tutoring?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:BOE disagrees with this group. They want MCPS metric to be more aligned with the rest of the districts in MD.

And other DMV districts in general. Let’s be real- the time for any limiting reopening has passed and schools aren’t opening any time soon even if they adjust to be more in line with everyone else. But MCPS will start to look ridiculous if they are the lone holdout when things do improve.

Yes, so they won't be.

Rrrriiiiggghhhhtttt, and in order for that to happen, they have to change...the...metrics....

Yes, and you know what's not going to make that happen? Repeatedly hollering

1. "Dr. Gayles is an unqualified fool who couldn't find his own toes in the baby pool."
2. "The CDC something something something science!"

on the internet.

Nobody is saying he couldn't find his toes. But he is certainly not qualified to be coming up with his own metrics. Hopefully the BOE begins calling him out on it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:BOE disagrees with this group. They want MCPS metric to be more aligned with the rest of the districts in MD.

And other DMV districts in general. Let’s be real- the time for any limiting reopening has passed and schools aren’t opening any time soon even if they adjust to be more in line with everyone else. But MCPS will start to look ridiculous if they are the lone holdout when things do improve.

Yes, so they won't be.

Rrrriiiiggghhhhtttt, and in order for that to happen, they have to change...the...metrics....

Yes, and you know what's not going to make that happen? Repeatedly hollering

1. "Dr. Gayles is an unqualified fool who couldn't find his own toes in the baby pool."
2. "The CDC something something something science!"

on the internet.

Nobody is saying he couldn't find his toes. But he is certainly not qualified to be coming up with his own metrics. Hopefully the BOE begins calling him out on it.

Well, this is the same BOE that thought it should develop its own curriculum, so . . .

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why are we even arguing about 5 or 15 per 100,000 right now, when our numbers are triple or quadruple that at the moment? It was like 40 per 100,000 yesterday. The virus is everywhere. The focus right now should be on the governor getting this spiraling mess under control.

Because this is the Hate On MCPS forum.

No. We expect MCPS to make decisions based on science. Not on whims and ‘feelings’.

5 per 100K is ridiculous.

And at some point, we will be back down to 15 per 100K, so it makes sense to look ahead.

+1. Now is the time to adopt reasonable metrics backed by the experts like the CDC. There is no reason to wait until we hit that point to establish the metrics.

+2
MCPS' failure to follow any kind of scientific evidence is embarrassing. Dr. Gayles still hasn't provided a rationale for these metrics, has he?

It's impossible for him to provide rationale (at least credible rationale) because he's not an expert in this area. He may as well have rolled a D&D d20 and landed on a 5. That would have made more sense than anything he's offered up.

LOL! I mean, I agree with you, and that's the whole problem. You have a bunch of parents with even less expertise than Dr. Gayles starting this petition, which then affects all of us. I don't expect everyone to be an expert, but I would hope that most people know to ask for evidence before starting nonsense petitions like this one.

Only you and Gayles believe he is the smartest person in the room. You have not have noticed, this MoCo is very educated area with an inordinate amount of scientists, many of which are parents. Gayles intellect needs to be questioned, because he is not following ALL OF THE OTHER SCIENCE.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Well, this is the same BOE that thought it should develop its own curriculum, so . . .

No, it's not.

Unless you also want to say that this Senate is the same Senate that passed the Civil Rights Act of 1964?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why would they go against these best practices and put people's lives at risk? To placate a few whiners who are demanding their free daycare?

"a few whiners who are demanding their free daycare" = the families of half of the students with responses to the MCPS survey

Not all families actually responded. So it’ s not even half of all the children served.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Well, this is the same BOE that thought it should develop its own curriculum, so . . .

No, it's not.

Unless you also want to say that this Senate is the same Senate that passed the Civil Rights Act of 1964?

The curriculum decision was a we bit more recent than 50+ years ago.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why are we even arguing about 5 or 15 per 100,000 right now, when our numbers are triple or quadruple that at the moment? It was like 40 per 100,000 yesterday. The virus is everywhere. The focus right now should be on the governor getting this spiraling mess under control.

Because this is the Hate On MCPS forum.

No. We expect MCPS to make decisions based on science. Not on whims and ‘feelings’.

5 per 100K is ridiculous.

And at some point, we will be back down to 15 per 100K, so it makes sense to look ahead.

+1. Now is the time to adopt reasonable metrics backed by the experts like the CDC. There is no reason to wait until we hit that point to establish the metrics.

+2
MCPS' failure to follow any kind of scientific evidence is embarrassing. Dr. Gayles still hasn't provided a rationale for these metrics, has he?

It's impossible for him to provide rationale (at least credible rationale) because he's not an expert in this area. He may as well have rolled a D&D d20 and landed on a 5. That would have made more sense than anything he's offered up.

LOL! I mean, I agree with you, and that's the whole problem. You have a bunch of parents with even less expertise than Dr. Gayles starting this petition, which then affects all of us. I don't expect everyone to be an expert, but I would hope that most people know to ask for evidence before starting nonsense petitions like this one.

Only you and Gayles believe he is the smartest person in the room. You have not have noticed, this MoCo is very educated area with an inordinate amount of scientists, many of which are parents. Gayles intellect needs to be questioned, because he is not following ALL OF THE OTHER SCIENCE.

Um. Who, exactly are you replying to? If it's me (the PP directly above your response), you're completely misunderstanding my comment.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Well, this is the same BOE that thought it should develop its own curriculum, so . . .

No, it's not.

Unless you also want to say that this Senate is the same Senate that passed the Civil Rights Act of 1964?

The curriculum decision was a we bit more recent than 50+ years ago.

OK, this Senate is the same Senate that passed the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009. Yes?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why are we even arguing about 5 or 15 per 100,000 right now, when our numbers are triple or quadruple that at the moment? It was like 40 per 100,000 yesterday. The virus is everywhere. The focus right now should be on the governor getting this spiraling mess under control.

Because this is the Hate On MCPS forum.

No. We expect MCPS to make decisions based on science. Not on whims and ‘feelings’.

5 per 100K is ridiculous.

And at some point, we will be back down to 15 per 100K, so it makes sense to look ahead.

+1. Now is the time to adopt reasonable metrics backed by the experts like the CDC. There is no reason to wait until we hit that point to establish the metrics.

+2
MCPS' failure to follow any kind of scientific evidence is embarrassing. Dr. Gayles still hasn't provided a rationale for these metrics, has he?

Doesn’t he keep trying to vaguely reference cdc, which just sends everyone on an endless search to find something that doesn’t exist?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Well, this is the same BOE that thought it should develop its own curriculum, so . . .

No, it's not.

Unless you also want to say that this Senate is the same Senate that passed the Civil Rights Act of 1964?

The curriculum decision was a we bit more recent than 50+ years ago.

OK, this Senate is the same Senate that passed the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009. Yes?

To a significant degree it is. And, in MoCo, you don't have a change of the party in power.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Well, this is the same BOE that thought it should develop its own curriculum, so . . .

No, it's not.

Unless you also want to say that this Senate is the same Senate that passed the Civil Rights Act of 1964?

The curriculum decision was a we bit more recent than 50+ years ago.

OK, this Senate is the same Senate that passed the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009. Yes?

To a significant degree it is. And, in MoCo, you don't have a change of the party in power.

Not to the degree of being able to pass another covid bill or even a defense appropriations bill, which seems significant to me.

The BoE members in 2010 were: Shirley Brandman, Patricia O'Neill, Nancy Navarro, Phil Kauffman, Chris Barclay, Laura Berthiaume, Judy Docca, and SMOB Quratul-Ann Malik.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Because if teachers, their horrible union and the BOE continue this bullshit, schools will never open. Every one in the aforementioned groups needs to be called out for being science deniers and holding our students education hostage.

C'mon, don't hold back!

[Anonymous]

I can't believe people are actually citing the CDC. The same CDC that decided 3-4 feet of distance was fine because political people wanted it so, and then undecided that, and told us that masks weren't necessary and then that they really were, and then figured out that 15 minutes consecutive vs. cumulative exposure were actually different? Because other areas of the country that aren't actually doing much testing "know" that the currently out of control spread magically stops at school gates? Because other countries that actually lock down businesses and provide social supports for the economic fallout and have universal health care have different numbers that we will never achieve because we have none of those things? Come on.

I'm not saying Gayles is right. He seems awfully conservative. But to claim that "the science" has the definitive answer on schools and "the CDC" is omniscient, when we're only 9 months into this and we have thousands of years of history of "everybody" knowing a scientific principle and then it turning out to be wrong, is absurd. This is a disagreement about risk assessment and probabilities, not "the science." Nobody is certain. Neither side should act like they have The Answer and The Knowledge.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I can't believe people are actually citing the CDC. The same CDC that decided 3-4 feet of distance was fine because political people wanted it so, and then undecided that, and told us that masks weren't necessary and then that they really were, and then figured out that 15 minutes consecutive vs. cumulative exposure were actually different? Because other areas of the country that aren't actually doing much testing "know" that the currently out of control spread magically stops at school gates? Because other countries that actually lock down businesses and provide social supports for the economic fallout and have universal health care have different numbers that we will never achieve because we have none of those things? Come on.

I'm not saying Gayles is right. He seems awfully conservative. But to claim that "the science" has the definitive answer on schools and "the CDC" is omniscient, when we're only 9 months into this and we have thousands of years of history of "everybody" knowing a scientific principle and then it turning out to be wrong, is absurd. This is a disagreement about risk assessment and probabilities, not "the science." Nobody is certain. Neither side should act like they have The Answer and The Knowledge.

I don't disagree, but Dr. Gayles' metrics are more conservative than CHOP's. That matters because, unlike the CDC, CHOP remains highly credible. I want Dr. Gayles to explain why his metrics are more conservative than CHOP's, in particular. That seems hard to defend.