In-person school plans

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This was sent from the principal of Poolesville High School. Sounds like supervised virtual.

-----

While much is still left to be decided, it is important to understand that the students’ experiences in the building will not look the same as it did before the pandemic. We are so excited at the prospect of welcoming our students back, but that excitement comes with setting realistic expectations and understanding our limitations. Most students who return partially to the building are coming in for support as a compliment to the virtual experience, and they will have adults available to supervise and support their virtual learning. I will be transparent in our planning, and I will keep you updated with any logistics, schedule changes, and expectations. I appreciate your patience and support as we design the virtual and in-person experiences for our students.

Supervised virtual (aka DL with babysitting according to my principal) is planned for my MS. Definitely not what we had in March.

Meaning, there will be no live instruction in the classroom? Teachers will still be teaching from home and kids in the classroom will see them on screens?
That's not what I thought 'hybrid' entailed. In MS kids don't need babysitting, if that's what the plan is, everyone might as well continue DL from home.

Each school has some flexibility to adopt a model that works for them, based on the needs of their staff and students. This is definitely one of the ones that came up during our staff meeting as being one of the possible choices. Teachers wouldn't be teaching from home (unless they had an ADA accommodation) but they might be teaching via Zoom to students in the same classroom that they are in (while simultaneously teaching to students who are learning from home). This seems like the worst option, as it has all of the negatives of DL without any of the benefits (such as being able to get up and stretch, going to grab a snack, not having to wear as mask etc.).

The reason for this has to do with the lack of funds (and people) to hire more staff. Assuming that a school had exactly 50 % pick DL and and 50 % pick in-person, the DL half would still need instruction while the IP half were in the school. This would mean hiring twice as many teachers which isn't feasible. Ergo the concurrent/simultaneous model

If only 50% of the kids chose in-person, they should be able to go to school 5 days a week where the 50% teachers teach them in person. The rest can stay virtual 5 days a week and the other half of the teachers can teach them virtually. No need to hire anyone. Problem solved.

Let's look at a sample elementary grade, say fifth grade. In the whole grade level there are 100 students. Right now they are split between four teachers (25 per class). Now that a return to in-person instruction is being considered, 50 of them want to return for in-person and 50 want to remain DL. The 50 students who want to continue DL are split into two groups of 25 and two of the teachers instruct them. That leaves the 50 students for in-person instruction to be taught by the other two teachers. Typically you could have two classes of 25, but the classes sizes have to be significantly reduced (no more than 13 students per room) in order to maintain social distancing. That means that both classes of 25 would actually need to be split in half, which would result in the school needing a total of four teachers for in-person instruction. This results in a shortfall of two teachers since the school needs a total of six in order to teacher in-person and DL and they only have four. Problem, most certainly, not solved. Not unless the county can find the funds and the teachers.

Here it is, broken down another way:
Teacher 1: Teaches 25 students via Zoom five days a week
Teacher 2: Teaches 25 students via Zoom five days a week
Teacher 3: Teachers 12-13 students in-person five days a week
Teacher 4: Teachers 12-13 students in-person five days a week
25 students, whose parent's signed them up for in-person instruction, are not receiving any instruction

Therefore they need to hire two new teachers to offset the reduced class sizes:
Teacher 1: Teaches 25 students via Zoom five days a week
Teacher 2: Teaches 25 students via Zoom five days a week
Teacher 3: Teaches 12-13 students in-person five days a week
Teacher 4: Teaches 12-13 students in-person five days a week
Teacher 5 (New hire): Teaches 12-13 students in-person five days a week
Teacher 6 (New hire): Teaches 12-13 students in-person five days a week

NP - if teachers are vaccinated they don’t need to maintain social distance, just masks for all. They can keep all 4 classes at 25 students. Also they can teach 5 days a week, rather than 4+homeroom only on Wed, which is a joke. Parents who don’t want their kids in person can simply keep them in DL.

But the kids still need to social distance too.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This was sent from the principal of Poolesville High School. Sounds like supervised virtual.

-----

While much is still left to be decided, it is important to understand that the students’ experiences in the building will not look the same as it did before the pandemic. We are so excited at the prospect of welcoming our students back, but that excitement comes with setting realistic expectations and understanding our limitations. Most students who return partially to the building are coming in for support as a compliment to the virtual experience, and they will have adults available to supervise and support their virtual learning. I will be transparent in our planning, and I will keep you updated with any logistics, schedule changes, and expectations. I appreciate your patience and support as we design the virtual and in-person experiences for our students.

Supervised virtual (aka DL with babysitting according to my principal) is planned for my MS. Definitely not what we had in March.

Meaning, there will be no live instruction in the classroom? Teachers will still be teaching from home and kids in the classroom will see them on screens?
That's not what I thought 'hybrid' entailed. In MS kids don't need babysitting, if that's what the plan is, everyone might as well continue DL from home.

Each school has some flexibility to adopt a model that works for them, based on the needs of their staff and students. This is definitely one of the ones that came up during our staff meeting as being one of the possible choices. Teachers wouldn't be teaching from home (unless they had an ADA accommodation) but they might be teaching via Zoom to students in the same classroom that they are in (while simultaneously teaching to students who are learning from home). This seems like the worst option, as it has all of the negatives of DL without any of the benefits (such as being able to get up and stretch, going to grab a snack, not having to wear as mask etc.).

The reason for this has to do with the lack of funds (and people) to hire more staff. Assuming that a school had exactly 50 % pick DL and and 50 % pick in-person, the DL half would still need instruction while the IP half were in the school. This would mean hiring twice as many teachers which isn't feasible. Ergo the concurrent/simultaneous model

If only 50% of the kids chose in-person, they should be able to go to school 5 days a week where the 50% teachers teach them in person. The rest can stay virtual 5 days a week and the other half of the teachers can teach them virtually. No need to hire anyone. Problem solved.

Let's look at a sample elementary grade, say fifth grade. In the whole grade level there are 100 students. Right now they are split between four teachers (25 per class). Now that a return to in-person instruction is being considered, 50 of them want to return for in-person and 50 want to remain DL. The 50 students who want to continue DL are split into two groups of 25 and two of the teachers instruct them. That leaves the 50 students for in-person instruction to be taught by the other two teachers. Typically you could have two classes of 25, but the classes sizes have to be significantly reduced (no more than 13 students per room) in order to maintain social distancing. That means that both classes of 25 would actually need to be split in half, which would result in the school needing a total of four teachers for in-person instruction. This results in a shortfall of two teachers since the school needs a total of six in order to teacher in-person and DL and they only have four. Problem, most certainly, not solved. Not unless the county can find the funds and the teachers.

Here it is, broken down another way:
Teacher 1: Teaches 25 students via Zoom five days a week
Teacher 2: Teaches 25 students via Zoom five days a week
Teacher 3: Teachers 12-13 students in-person five days a week
Teacher 4: Teachers 12-13 students in-person five days a week
25 students, whose parent's signed them up for in-person instruction, are not receiving any instruction

Therefore they need to hire two new teachers to offset the reduced class sizes:
Teacher 1: Teaches 25 students via Zoom five days a week
Teacher 2: Teaches 25 students via Zoom five days a week
Teacher 3: Teaches 12-13 students in-person five days a week
Teacher 4: Teaches 12-13 students in-person five days a week
Teacher 5 (New hire): Teaches 12-13 students in-person five days a week
Teacher 6 (New hire): Teaches 12-13 students in-person five days a week

NP - if teachers are vaccinated they don’t need to maintain social distance, just masks for all. They can keep all 4 classes at 25 students. Also they can teach 5 days a week, rather than 4+homeroom only on Wed, which is a joke. Parents who don’t want their kids in person can simply keep them in DL.

But the kids still need to social distance too.

Not given the effect of COVID on kids.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I work for MCPS. It is sounding more and more like the "support model" will be used if schools return. Like others have posted, students who opt in for returning to school will be in a classroom with an adult. The student will be spaced six feet away from the other kids and will log onto Zoom and continue learning the same way he/she did at home. The adult in the room might be a para who is supporting them (i.e. - babysitting) or could be a teacher who is also leading their own Zoom class. I can't imagine being a seven year old sitting in a classroom on Zoom being distracted by the teacher at the front of the room who is teaching another set of kids on Zoom who are learning at home or in another room.
The way it was explained to us is that most classrooms would only have 12 students. In my second grade classroom, I might be teaching my 21 students on Zoom. Of my 21 students, many of them will be virtual (based on their responses) but I'll have a mix of kids in my physical classroom. Some of them will be on Zoom with me (in the same room) while the rest will be on Zoom with my teammates who are teaching from home.
Personally, I wish we could do the direct model. 12 kids in the classroom with a teacher who is leading direct instruction like "normal". I know parents/teachers don't want to lose their classes but this support model looks like a disaster. I'd much rather have a new set of kids with me in my physical space if it means we can stay off Zoom and learn together in a traditional sense.

If you think Paras "babysit", you have no idea what's going on in classrooms.

Depends on the school but Paras are used to cover classes when teachers have meetings or there is indoor recess

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This was sent from the principal of Poolesville High School. Sounds like supervised virtual.

-----

While much is still left to be decided, it is important to understand that the students’ experiences in the building will not look the same as it did before the pandemic. We are so excited at the prospect of welcoming our students back, but that excitement comes with setting realistic expectations and understanding our limitations. Most students who return partially to the building are coming in for support as a compliment to the virtual experience, and they will have adults available to supervise and support their virtual learning. I will be transparent in our planning, and I will keep you updated with any logistics, schedule changes, and expectations. I appreciate your patience and support as we design the virtual and in-person experiences for our students.

Supervised virtual (aka DL with babysitting according to my principal) is planned for my MS. Definitely not what we had in March.

Meaning, there will be no live instruction in the classroom? Teachers will still be teaching from home and kids in the classroom will see them on screens?
That's not what I thought 'hybrid' entailed. In MS kids don't need babysitting, if that's what the plan is, everyone might as well continue DL from home.

Each school has some flexibility to adopt a model that works for them, based on the needs of their staff and students. This is definitely one of the ones that came up during our staff meeting as being one of the possible choices. Teachers wouldn't be teaching from home (unless they had an ADA accommodation) but they might be teaching via Zoom to students in the same classroom that they are in (while simultaneously teaching to students who are learning from home). This seems like the worst option, as it has all of the negatives of DL without any of the benefits (such as being able to get up and stretch, going to grab a snack, not having to wear as mask etc.).

The reason for this has to do with the lack of funds (and people) to hire more staff. Assuming that a school had exactly 50 % pick DL and and 50 % pick in-person, the DL half would still need instruction while the IP half were in the school. This would mean hiring twice as many teachers which isn't feasible. Ergo the concurrent/simultaneous model

If only 50% of the kids chose in-person, they should be able to go to school 5 days a week where the 50% teachers teach them in person. The rest can stay virtual 5 days a week and the other half of the teachers can teach them virtually. No need to hire anyone. Problem solved.

Let's look at a sample elementary grade, say fifth grade. In the whole grade level there are 100 students. Right now they are split between four teachers (25 per class). Now that a return to in-person instruction is being considered, 50 of them want to return for in-person and 50 want to remain DL. The 50 students who want to continue DL are split into two groups of 25 and two of the teachers instruct them. That leaves the 50 students for in-person instruction to be taught by the other two teachers. Typically you could have two classes of 25, but the classes sizes have to be significantly reduced (no more than 13 students per room) in order to maintain social distancing. That means that both classes of 25 would actually need to be split in half, which would result in the school needing a total of four teachers for in-person instruction. This results in a shortfall of two teachers since the school needs a total of six in order to teacher in-person and DL and they only have four. Problem, most certainly, not solved. Not unless the county can find the funds and the teachers.

Here it is, broken down another way:
Teacher 1: Teaches 25 students via Zoom five days a week
Teacher 2: Teaches 25 students via Zoom five days a week
Teacher 3: Teachers 12-13 students in-person five days a week
Teacher 4: Teachers 12-13 students in-person five days a week
25 students, whose parent's signed them up for in-person instruction, are not receiving any instruction

Therefore they need to hire two new teachers to offset the reduced class sizes:
Teacher 1: Teaches 25 students via Zoom five days a week
Teacher 2: Teaches 25 students via Zoom five days a week
Teacher 3: Teaches 12-13 students in-person five days a week
Teacher 4: Teaches 12-13 students in-person five days a week
Teacher 5 (New hire): Teaches 12-13 students in-person five days a week
Teacher 6 (New hire): Teaches 12-13 students in-person five days a week

NP - if teachers are vaccinated they don’t need to maintain social distance, just masks for all. They can keep all 4 classes at 25 students. Also they can teach 5 days a week, rather than 4+homeroom only on Wed, which is a joke. Parents who don’t want their kids in person can simply keep them in DL.

But the kids still need to social distance too.

Not given the effect of COVID on kids.

No. Cdc guidelines are about reducing risk for everybody not saying "well teachers are vaccinated so who cares if all the kids get such"

If a kid gets covid they are expected to qurrantine for 10 days along with their household. I can tell you from experience that a kid can get a mild case but their parents did not.

Posts like this are why teachers can't trust parents to do the right thing and not intentionally send a sick kid to school because they can't be bothered to qurrantine. It happened in Utah (https://www.google.com/amp/s/kutv.com/amp/news/coronavirus/parents-fear-mom-code-will-keep-covid-19-numbers-artificially-low-in-utah-schools)
Indiana (https://www.953mnc.com/2020/08/10/mother-refuses-to-get-daughter-tested-for-covid-19/) and other places.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This was sent from the principal of Poolesville High School. Sounds like supervised virtual.

-----

While much is still left to be decided, it is important to understand that the students’ experiences in the building will not look the same as it did before the pandemic. We are so excited at the prospect of welcoming our students back, but that excitement comes with setting realistic expectations and understanding our limitations. Most students who return partially to the building are coming in for support as a compliment to the virtual experience, and they will have adults available to supervise and support their virtual learning. I will be transparent in our planning, and I will keep you updated with any logistics, schedule changes, and expectations. I appreciate your patience and support as we design the virtual and in-person experiences for our students.

Supervised virtual (aka DL with babysitting according to my principal) is planned for my MS. Definitely not what we had in March.

Meaning, there will be no live instruction in the classroom? Teachers will still be teaching from home and kids in the classroom will see them on screens?
That's not what I thought 'hybrid' entailed. In MS kids don't need babysitting, if that's what the plan is, everyone might as well continue DL from home.

Each school has some flexibility to adopt a model that works for them, based on the needs of their staff and students. This is definitely one of the ones that came up during our staff meeting as being one of the possible choices. Teachers wouldn't be teaching from home (unless they had an ADA accommodation) but they might be teaching via Zoom to students in the same classroom that they are in (while simultaneously teaching to students who are learning from home). This seems like the worst option, as it has all of the negatives of DL without any of the benefits (such as being able to get up and stretch, going to grab a snack, not having to wear as mask etc.).

The reason for this has to do with the lack of funds (and people) to hire more staff. Assuming that a school had exactly 50 % pick DL and and 50 % pick in-person, the DL half would still need instruction while the IP half were in the school. This would mean hiring twice as many teachers which isn't feasible. Ergo the concurrent/simultaneous model

If only 50% of the kids chose in-person, they should be able to go to school 5 days a week where the 50% teachers teach them in person. The rest can stay virtual 5 days a week and the other half of the teachers can teach them virtually. No need to hire anyone. Problem solved.

Let's look at a sample elementary grade, say fifth grade. In the whole grade level there are 100 students. Right now they are split between four teachers (25 per class). Now that a return to in-person instruction is being considered, 50 of them want to return for in-person and 50 want to remain DL. The 50 students who want to continue DL are split into two groups of 25 and two of the teachers instruct them. That leaves the 50 students for in-person instruction to be taught by the other two teachers. Typically you could have two classes of 25, but the classes sizes have to be significantly reduced (no more than 13 students per room) in order to maintain social distancing. That means that both classes of 25 would actually need to be split in half, which would result in the school needing a total of four teachers for in-person instruction. This results in a shortfall of two teachers since the school needs a total of six in order to teacher in-person and DL and they only have four. Problem, most certainly, not solved. Not unless the county can find the funds and the teachers.

Here it is, broken down another way:
Teacher 1: Teaches 25 students via Zoom five days a week
Teacher 2: Teaches 25 students via Zoom five days a week
Teacher 3: Teachers 12-13 students in-person five days a week
Teacher 4: Teachers 12-13 students in-person five days a week
25 students, whose parent's signed them up for in-person instruction, are not receiving any instruction

Therefore they need to hire two new teachers to offset the reduced class sizes:
Teacher 1: Teaches 25 students via Zoom five days a week
Teacher 2: Teaches 25 students via Zoom five days a week
Teacher 3: Teaches 12-13 students in-person five days a week
Teacher 4: Teaches 12-13 students in-person five days a week
Teacher 5 (New hire): Teaches 12-13 students in-person five days a week
Teacher 6 (New hire): Teaches 12-13 students in-person five days a week

NP - if teachers are vaccinated they don’t need to maintain social distance, just masks for all. They can keep all 4 classes at 25 students. Also they can teach 5 days a week, rather than 4+homeroom only on Wed, which is a joke. Parents who don’t want their kids in person can simply keep them in DL.

But the kids still need to social distance too.

Not given the effect of COVID on kids.

No. Cdc guidelines are about reducing risk for everybody not saying "well teachers are vaccinated so who cares if all the kids get such"

If a kid gets covid they are expected to qurrantine for 10 days along with their household. I can tell you from experience that a kid can get a mild case but their parents did not.

Posts like this are why teachers can't trust parents to do the right thing and not intentionally send a sick kid to school because they can't be bothered to qurrantine. It happened in Utah (https://www.google.com/amp/s/kutv.com/amp/news/coronavirus/parents-fear-mom-code-will-keep-covid-19-numbers-artificially-low-in-utah-schools)
Indiana (https://www.953mnc.com/2020/08/10/mother-refuses-to-get-daughter-tested-for-covid-19/) and other places.

Sure, but if mitigations are followed, that "sick kid" won't spread the disease. That is why we have masks, etc. Sorry you don't trust us teachers. We don't trust you either, because you are constantly trying to find any reason to stay home while kids are suffering from school failure, depression, child abuse, hunger, stress, obesity, and even suicide. It is time to open doors NOW.

[Anonymous]

If the kids have high risk family members, they will
also be vaccinated. Al adults will be vaccinated shortly. Covid is just not that dangerous to healthy people. Anyone who wants to can keep their kids home for the rest of the year.

Once teachers are vaccinated, there’s no need for anything other than masks for the rest of the years. Five days a week school is supported by the science.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:If the kids have high risk family members, they will
also be vaccinated. Al adults will be vaccinated shortly. Covid is just not that dangerous to healthy people. Anyone who wants to can keep their kids home for the rest of the year.

Once teachers are vaccinated, there’s no need for anything other than masks for the rest of the years. Five days a week school is supported by the science.

Not true. Social distancing is still required.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If the kids have high risk family members, they will
also be vaccinated. Al adults will be vaccinated shortly. Covid is just not that dangerous to healthy people. Anyone who wants to can keep their kids home for the rest of the year.

Once teachers are vaccinated, there’s no need for anything other than masks for the rest of the years. Five days a week school is supported by the science.

Not true. Social distancing is still required.

I work with students with emotional disabilities. It will be very interesting to see how we can find creative ways to keep their masks on throughout the day. My students are very easily triggered and can become quite physical when their emotions get the best of them.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This was sent from the principal of Poolesville High School. Sounds like supervised virtual.

-----

While much is still left to be decided, it is important to understand that the students’ experiences in the building will not look the same as it did before the pandemic. We are so excited at the prospect of welcoming our students back, but that excitement comes with setting realistic expectations and understanding our limitations. Most students who return partially to the building are coming in for support as a compliment to the virtual experience, and they will have adults available to supervise and support their virtual learning. I will be transparent in our planning, and I will keep you updated with any logistics, schedule changes, and expectations. I appreciate your patience and support as we design the virtual and in-person experiences for our students.

Supervised virtual (aka DL with babysitting according to my principal) is planned for my MS. Definitely not what we had in March.

Meaning, there will be no live instruction in the classroom? Teachers will still be teaching from home and kids in the classroom will see them on screens?
That's not what I thought 'hybrid' entailed. In MS kids don't need babysitting, if that's what the plan is, everyone might as well continue DL from home.

Each school has some flexibility to adopt a model that works for them, based on the needs of their staff and students. This is definitely one of the ones that came up during our staff meeting as being one of the possible choices. Teachers wouldn't be teaching from home (unless they had an ADA accommodation) but they might be teaching via Zoom to students in the same classroom that they are in (while simultaneously teaching to students who are learning from home). This seems like the worst option, as it has all of the negatives of DL without any of the benefits (such as being able to get up and stretch, going to grab a snack, not having to wear as mask etc.).

The reason for this has to do with the lack of funds (and people) to hire more staff. Assuming that a school had exactly 50 % pick DL and and 50 % pick in-person, the DL half would still need instruction while the IP half were in the school. This would mean hiring twice as many teachers which isn't feasible. Ergo the concurrent/simultaneous model

If only 50% of the kids chose in-person, they should be able to go to school 5 days a week where the 50% teachers teach them in person. The rest can stay virtual 5 days a week and the other half of the teachers can teach them virtually. No need to hire anyone. Problem solved.

Let's look at a sample elementary grade, say fifth grade. In the whole grade level there are 100 students. Right now they are split between four teachers (25 per class). Now that a return to in-person instruction is being considered, 50 of them want to return for in-person and 50 want to remain DL. The 50 students who want to continue DL are split into two groups of 25 and two of the teachers instruct them. That leaves the 50 students for in-person instruction to be taught by the other two teachers. Typically you could have two classes of 25, but the classes sizes have to be significantly reduced (no more than 13 students per room) in order to maintain social distancing. That means that both classes of 25 would actually need to be split in half, which would result in the school needing a total of four teachers for in-person instruction. This results in a shortfall of two teachers since the school needs a total of six in order to teacher in-person and DL and they only have four. Problem, most certainly, not solved. Not unless the county can find the funds and the teachers.

Here it is, broken down another way:
Teacher 1: Teaches 25 students via Zoom five days a week
Teacher 2: Teaches 25 students via Zoom five days a week
Teacher 3: Teachers 12-13 students in-person five days a week
Teacher 4: Teachers 12-13 students in-person five days a week
25 students, whose parent's signed them up for in-person instruction, are not receiving any instruction

Therefore they need to hire two new teachers to offset the reduced class sizes:
Teacher 1: Teaches 25 students via Zoom five days a week
Teacher 2: Teaches 25 students via Zoom five days a week
Teacher 3: Teaches 12-13 students in-person five days a week
Teacher 4: Teaches 12-13 students in-person five days a week
Teacher 5 (New hire): Teaches 12-13 students in-person five days a week
Teacher 6 (New hire): Teaches 12-13 students in-person five days a week

NP - if teachers are vaccinated they don’t need to maintain social distance, just masks for all. They can keep all 4 classes at 25 students. Also they can teach 5 days a week, rather than 4+homeroom only on Wed, which is a joke. Parents who don’t want their kids in person can simply keep them in DL.

But the kids still need to social distance too.

Not given the effect of COVID on kids.

No. Cdc guidelines are about reducing risk for everybody not saying "well teachers are vaccinated so who cares if all the kids get such"

If a kid gets covid they are expected to qurrantine for 10 days along with their household. I can tell you from experience that a kid can get a mild case but their parents did not.

Posts like this are why teachers can't trust parents to do the right thing and not intentionally send a sick kid to school because they can't be bothered to qurrantine. It happened in Utah (https://www.google.com/amp/s/kutv.com/amp/news/coronavirus/parents-fear-mom-code-will-keep-covid-19-numbers-artificially-low-in-utah-schools)
Indiana (https://www.953mnc.com/2020/08/10/mother-refuses-to-get-daughter-tested-for-covid-19/) and other places.

Sure, but if mitigations are followed, that "sick kid" won't spread the disease. That is why we have masks, etc. Sorry you don't trust us teachers. We don't trust you either, because you are constantly trying to find any reason to stay home while kids are suffering from school failure, depression, child abuse, hunger, stress, obesity, and even suicide. It is time to open doors NOW.

You're talking our of both sides of your mouth.

First post said that kids don't need to social distance.

Now you're saying "if you follow mitigation then kids won't get sick"

I want to reopen schools safely but I'm tired of all the magical thinking from parents about how covid could never affect them do they throw caution to the wind

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:If the kids have high risk family members, they will
also be vaccinated. Al adults will be vaccinated shortly. Covid is just not that dangerous to healthy people. Anyone who wants to can keep their kids home for the rest of the year.

Once teachers are vaccinated, there’s no need for anything other than masks for the rest of the years. Five days a week school is supported by the science.

The vaccine isn't approved for kids under 16. It will not be approved for another year or two as per FDA regulations. in a few years will be as common as the flu vaccine for kids but not right now

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This was sent from the principal of Poolesville High School. Sounds like supervised virtual.

-----

While much is still left to be decided, it is important to understand that the students’ experiences in the building will not look the same as it did before the pandemic. We are so excited at the prospect of welcoming our students back, but that excitement comes with setting realistic expectations and understanding our limitations. Most students who return partially to the building are coming in for support as a compliment to the virtual experience, and they will have adults available to supervise and support their virtual learning. I will be transparent in our planning, and I will keep you updated with any logistics, schedule changes, and expectations. I appreciate your patience and support as we design the virtual and in-person experiences for our students.

Supervised virtual (aka DL with babysitting according to my principal) is planned for my MS. Definitely not what we had in March.

Meaning, there will be no live instruction in the classroom? Teachers will still be teaching from home and kids in the classroom will see them on screens?
That's not what I thought 'hybrid' entailed. In MS kids don't need babysitting, if that's what the plan is, everyone might as well continue DL from home.

Each school has some flexibility to adopt a model that works for them, based on the needs of their staff and students. This is definitely one of the ones that came up during our staff meeting as being one of the possible choices. Teachers wouldn't be teaching from home (unless they had an ADA accommodation) but they might be teaching via Zoom to students in the same classroom that they are in (while simultaneously teaching to students who are learning from home). This seems like the worst option, as it has all of the negatives of DL without any of the benefits (such as being able to get up and stretch, going to grab a snack, not having to wear as mask etc.).

The reason for this has to do with the lack of funds (and people) to hire more staff. Assuming that a school had exactly 50 % pick DL and and 50 % pick in-person, the DL half would still need instruction while the IP half were in the school. This would mean hiring twice as many teachers which isn't feasible. Ergo the concurrent/simultaneous model

If only 50% of the kids chose in-person, they should be able to go to school 5 days a week where the 50% teachers teach them in person. The rest can stay virtual 5 days a week and the other half of the teachers can teach them virtually. No need to hire anyone. Problem solved.

Let's look at a sample elementary grade, say fifth grade. In the whole grade level there are 100 students. Right now they are split between four teachers (25 per class). Now that a return to in-person instruction is being considered, 50 of them want to return for in-person and 50 want to remain DL. The 50 students who want to continue DL are split into two groups of 25 and two of the teachers instruct them. That leaves the 50 students for in-person instruction to be taught by the other two teachers. Typically you could have two classes of 25, but the classes sizes have to be significantly reduced (no more than 13 students per room) in order to maintain social distancing. That means that both classes of 25 would actually need to be split in half, which would result in the school needing a total of four teachers for in-person instruction. This results in a shortfall of two teachers since the school needs a total of six in order to teacher in-person and DL and they only have four. Problem, most certainly, not solved. Not unless the county can find the funds and the teachers.

Here it is, broken down another way:
Teacher 1: Teaches 25 students via Zoom five days a week
Teacher 2: Teaches 25 students via Zoom five days a week
Teacher 3: Teachers 12-13 students in-person five days a week
Teacher 4: Teachers 12-13 students in-person five days a week
25 students, whose parent's signed them up for in-person instruction, are not receiving any instruction

Therefore they need to hire two new teachers to offset the reduced class sizes:
Teacher 1: Teaches 25 students via Zoom five days a week
Teacher 2: Teaches 25 students via Zoom five days a week
Teacher 3: Teaches 12-13 students in-person five days a week
Teacher 4: Teaches 12-13 students in-person five days a week
Teacher 5 (New hire): Teaches 12-13 students in-person five days a week
Teacher 6 (New hire): Teaches 12-13 students in-person five days a week

NP - if teachers are vaccinated they don’t need to maintain social distance, just masks for all. They can keep all 4 classes at 25 students. Also they can teach 5 days a week, rather than 4+homeroom only on Wed, which is a joke. Parents who don’t want their kids in person can simply keep them in DL.

But the kids still need to social distance too.

Not given the effect of COVID on kids.

No. Cdc guidelines are about reducing risk for everybody not saying "well teachers are vaccinated so who cares if all the kids get such"

If a kid gets covid they are expected to qurrantine for 10 days along with their household. I can tell you from experience that a kid can get a mild case but their parents did not.

Posts like this are why teachers can't trust parents to do the right thing and not intentionally send a sick kid to school because they can't be bothered to qurrantine. It happened in Utah (https://www.google.com/amp/s/kutv.com/amp/news/coronavirus/parents-fear-mom-code-will-keep-covid-19-numbers-artificially-low-in-utah-schools)
Indiana (https://www.953mnc.com/2020/08/10/mother-refuses-to-get-daughter-tested-for-covid-19/) and other places.

Sure, but if mitigations are followed, that "sick kid" won't spread the disease. That is why we have masks, etc. Sorry you don't trust us teachers. We don't trust you either, because you are constantly trying to find any reason to stay home while kids are suffering from school failure, depression, child abuse, hunger, stress, obesity, and even suicide. It is time to open doors NOW.

Sick kids can still spread the disease to parents. It happened in my my family to both me and my cousin. So just be aware if your kid gets sick you're probably getting sick too.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This was sent from the principal of Poolesville High School. Sounds like supervised virtual.

-----

While much is still left to be decided, it is important to understand that the students’ experiences in the building will not look the same as it did before the pandemic. We are so excited at the prospect of welcoming our students back, but that excitement comes with setting realistic expectations and understanding our limitations. Most students who return partially to the building are coming in for support as a compliment to the virtual experience, and they will have adults available to supervise and support their virtual learning. I will be transparent in our planning, and I will keep you updated with any logistics, schedule changes, and expectations. I appreciate your patience and support as we design the virtual and in-person experiences for our students.

Supervised virtual (aka DL with babysitting according to my principal) is planned for my MS. Definitely not what we had in March.

Meaning, there will be no live instruction in the classroom? Teachers will still be teaching from home and kids in the classroom will see them on screens?
That's not what I thought 'hybrid' entailed. In MS kids don't need babysitting, if that's what the plan is, everyone might as well continue DL from home.

Each school has some flexibility to adopt a model that works for them, based on the needs of their staff and students. This is definitely one of the ones that came up during our staff meeting as being one of the possible choices. Teachers wouldn't be teaching from home (unless they had an ADA accommodation) but they might be teaching via Zoom to students in the same classroom that they are in (while simultaneously teaching to students who are learning from home). This seems like the worst option, as it has all of the negatives of DL without any of the benefits (such as being able to get up and stretch, going to grab a snack, not having to wear as mask etc.).

The reason for this has to do with the lack of funds (and people) to hire more staff. Assuming that a school had exactly 50 % pick DL and and 50 % pick in-person, the DL half would still need instruction while the IP half were in the school. This would mean hiring twice as many teachers which isn't feasible. Ergo the concurrent/simultaneous model

If only 50% of the kids chose in-person, they should be able to go to school 5 days a week where the 50% teachers teach them in person. The rest can stay virtual 5 days a week and the other half of the teachers can teach them virtually. No need to hire anyone. Problem solved.

Let's look at a sample elementary grade, say fifth grade. In the whole grade level there are 100 students. Right now they are split between four teachers (25 per class). Now that a return to in-person instruction is being considered, 50 of them want to return for in-person and 50 want to remain DL. The 50 students who want to continue DL are split into two groups of 25 and two of the teachers instruct them. That leaves the 50 students for in-person instruction to be taught by the other two teachers. Typically you could have two classes of 25, but the classes sizes have to be significantly reduced (no more than 13 students per room) in order to maintain social distancing. That means that both classes of 25 would actually need to be split in half, which would result in the school needing a total of four teachers for in-person instruction. This results in a shortfall of two teachers since the school needs a total of six in order to teacher in-person and DL and they only have four. Problem, most certainly, not solved. Not unless the county can find the funds and the teachers.

Here it is, broken down another way:
Teacher 1: Teaches 25 students via Zoom five days a week
Teacher 2: Teaches 25 students via Zoom five days a week
Teacher 3: Teachers 12-13 students in-person five days a week
Teacher 4: Teachers 12-13 students in-person five days a week
25 students, whose parent's signed them up for in-person instruction, are not receiving any instruction

Therefore they need to hire two new teachers to offset the reduced class sizes:
Teacher 1: Teaches 25 students via Zoom five days a week
Teacher 2: Teaches 25 students via Zoom five days a week
Teacher 3: Teaches 12-13 students in-person five days a week
Teacher 4: Teaches 12-13 students in-person five days a week
Teacher 5 (New hire): Teaches 12-13 students in-person five days a week
Teacher 6 (New hire): Teaches 12-13 students in-person five days a week

NP - if teachers are vaccinated they don’t need to maintain social distance, just masks for all. They can keep all 4 classes at 25 students. Also they can teach 5 days a week, rather than 4+homeroom only on Wed, which is a joke. Parents who don’t want their kids in person can simply keep them in DL.

But the kids still need to social distance too.

Not given the effect of COVID on kids .

You are going to LOVE Chicago’s solution:

The district has created “care rooms” and “care pods” to isolate sick children that include hospital-grade pop-up temporary structures that some have likened on social media to “plastic cages” for children that U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement might use.

https://www.seattletimes.com/nation-world/chicago-teachers-balk-at-reopening-plan-face-pay-loss-if-they-dont-return/

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:[
NP - if teachers are vaccinated they don’t need to maintain social distance, just masks for all. They can keep all 4 classes at 25 students. Also they can teach 5 days a week, rather than 4+homeroom only on Wed, which is a joke. Parents who don’t want their kids in person can simply keep them in DL.

But the kids still need to social distance too.

Not given the effect of COVID on kids.

No. Cdc guidelines are about reducing risk for everybody not saying "well teachers are vaccinated so who cares if all the kids get such"

If a kid gets covid they are expected to qurrantine for 10 days along with their household. I can tell you from experience that a kid can get a mild case but their parents did not.

Posts like this are why teachers can't trust parents to do the right thing and not intentionally send a sick kid to school because they can't be bothered to qurrantine. It happened in Utah (https://www.google.com/amp/s/kutv.com/amp/news/coronavirus/parents-fear-mom-code-will-keep-covid-19-numbers-artificially-low-in-utah-schools)
Indiana (https://www.953mnc.com/2020/08/10/mother-refuses-to-get-daughter-tested-for-covid-19/) and other places.

Sure, but if mitigations are followed, that "sick kid" won't spread the disease. That is why we have masks, etc. Sorry you don't trust us teachers. We don't trust you either, because you are constantly trying to find any reason to stay home while kids are suffering from school failure, depression, child abuse, hunger, stress, obesity, and even suicide. It is time to open doors NOW.

Sick kids can still spread the disease to parents. It happened in my my family to both me and my cousin. So just be aware if your kid gets sick you're probably getting sick too.

And parents like PP will probably spread it in their workplace, grocery store, and other locations before they feel sick enough to realize what Larlo brought home besides math homework.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If the kids have high risk family members, they will
also be vaccinated. Al adults will be vaccinated shortly. Covid is just not that dangerous to healthy people. Anyone who wants to can keep their kids home for the rest of the year.

Once teachers are vaccinated, there’s no need for anything other than masks for the rest of the years. Five days a week school is supported by the science.

The vaccine isn't approved for kids under 16. It will not be approved for another year or two as per FDA regulations. in a few years will be as common as the flu vaccine for kids but not right now

Students do not need to be vaccinated to return to school. No one other than unions are saying this. Even the new administration wants all schools open in 100 days. TeChers are going to be on the wrong side.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If the kids have high risk family members, they will
also be vaccinated. Al adults will be vaccinated shortly. Covid is just not that dangerous to healthy people. Anyone who wants to can keep their kids home for the rest of the year.

Once teachers are vaccinated, there’s no need for anything other than masks for the rest of the years. Five days a week school is supported by the science.

The vaccine isn't approved for kids under 16. It will not be approved for another year or two as per FDA regulations. in a few years will be as common as the flu vaccine for kids but not right now

Students do not need to be vaccinated to return to school. No one other than unions are saying this. Even the new administration wants all schools open in 100 days. TeChers are going to be on the wrong side.

I never said that 😂
I just said that. someone was claiming the kids are going to get vaccinated right away and I said that's not going to happen it's going to have to be in a couple of years. I never said that kids would have to be vaccinated as a condition for opening schools.

Maybe you should work on reading comprehension before you jump to conclusions.