Why is testing not part of the reopening plan?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’d prefer more testing to these blanket quarantine rules, because there is some indication that it’s just as effective (if not more so since people can’t lie) but far less burdensome. Of course I’d rather my kid get tested regularly than have to quarantine every time there’s a positive case or we travel (since all our travel is extremely cautious).

But I am also fine with just doing more of our own testing if that’s what it takes. We’ll test before we visit family as well as before returning to school after travel, as required. Plus we’ll test periodically anyway since our kid is at risk by going to school. It’s not as good as DCPS having a robust testing protocol, but at least it’s in our control. And it’s free! Why not?

Those posters claiming asymptomatic testing is meaningless will send their contagious kid into my kid's classroom. My testing my kid daily will not protect my kid. If half of the families in the class believe children shouldn't be infected with covid, and are willing to make some behavior adjustments, it will do that half little good to be the only kids in the classroom to do asymptomatic testing.
If the YOLCO (you only live childhood once?) refuse to participate in asymptomatic testing, just keep us separated! Those who don't want covid before the 5-11 vaccine, and those who don't want to be inconvenienced, in separate classrooms, whenever there are more that one class per grade. How about that?

Given that that’s not going to happen, the way for you to separate your kid from “those kids” is to keep them home. How hard is it to get into Friendship Online?

FWIW, I will not consent to testing because my kid has sensory issues and is very afraid of it, but I will otherwise do my best not to have my kid be contagious, with Covid or anything else. The only risk we will be taking is school, so if we had Covid, it would most likely have come from there. Not everyone who doesn’t opt into testing is careless about Covid.

Thank you for sharing, and for clarifying that #notallparents , I guess.
I think in this pandemic emergency, kids who cannot be tested because of neuropsychiatric reasons should be given the option of Virtual Academy since their special needs makes then unable to not be a risk to their peers. There should be flexibility in the self-contained classrooms, as well.

No, sorry. My kid needs in person school. We will test if there is known exposure or symptoms. But we will not subject her to the constant worry of whether she will be pulled for asymptomatic testing. We actually discussed this with both the teacher and the student support staff at our school this spring. You are the one who should look into the virtual option if a kid not opting into random asymptomatic testing is so threatening to you.

The PP cannot possibly be for real. Kids with SN are the ones who need IPL the most.

Every child is different. My son has adhd and an IEP due to issues from that and a speech disorder. He thrived better than he ever had in virtual schooling. The lack of structure and ability to not be physically confined/restricted to seats/area was very much beneficial to him and aided in his learning. And this was after a year where he was struggling beyond any words with school prior to going virtual. The 180 was also instantaneous once he went virtual and Sustained through the pandemic. In contrast, my neurotypical daughter really crumbled with virtual school, from academically to behaviorally to emotionally. To the point that Inpulled her and put her in private the first chance I got and she instantaneously began thriving again. I am eagerly sending them both back in person and wouldn’t tolerate even another day of virtual, but to say all SN kids do better in person vs virtual is completely false. I wouldn’t be surprised if it’s the majority, Though it’s certainly not a one size fits all thing.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Is it useful if so many opt out? People were complaining last year that it was an issue that it wasn’t complete enough. Now, with people tired and untrusting of guidelines, you are going to get less opt in. Shame people all you want, but that isn’t likely to change their behaviors. So it seems it isn’t likely to be 1) satisfactory to the loudest parents, and 2) particularly useful , and 3) probably cost beneficial.

It is very useful to know the spread and stop the spread. Parents and the school systems don't want to know so they can fully open as normal to appease parents who demand full reopening. It has nothing to do with cost.

NP but what PP is saying is that you won’t necessarily know the spread if too many kids opt out.

They should not be allowed to opt out.
If my family cannot opt for concurrent simulcast, other families in my child's classroom shouldn't be allowed to opt out of covid testing.

Can you force medical testing on kids? You can't force vaccinations on adults.

I don't know. Can you tell families it's testing or simulcast?

You can’t, because they aren’t offering simulcast. If you are uncomfortable with the protocols, you can homeschool. The public system isn’t required to accommodate your anxiety when the risk of Covid to kids is objectively very low.

Actually 3 charters have been approved by OSSE and the PSCB to offer online school with no medical documentation necessary. Not sure why OSSE approved their request (for no medical waiver) but not DCPS.

I think it’s kind of unreal too. Disappointed.

As far as I have heard, DCPS did not apply for a waiver. Which probably means that the mayor did not want there to be one.

to be clear, I am disappointed that the charters (including KIPP) pursued an online option and OSSE approved it. DC kids deserve better than DL.

The families are refusing to attend in person. Would you round them up and march them in forcibly?

Who is refusing to attend in person school? Why couldn’t they do Friendship? Or homeschool? Why did the school think it was wise to appease the DLers?

Are you nuts?
Good on KIPP for caring for their students and planning enough ahead to be DL-ready for the coming school year.

Are you an abusive troll?

I asked a straightforward question. Is there a group of parents refusing to go in to a school and somehow bending the arm of the school to provide DL? Why is that a bizarre question to answer?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If the city could manage false positives better, then I would opt in to testing. But this spring showed us that it can’t. So nope, they won’t be testing my kid again.

what happened with the false positive? a long time out of school?

Good question. Can’t you just test again?

LOL no. You are out of school for two weeks full stop. It doesn't matter if you test again and it is negative.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If the city could manage false positives better, then I would opt in to testing. But this spring showed us that it can’t. So nope, they won’t be testing my kid again.

what happened with the false positive? a long time out of school?

Good question. Can’t you just test again?

LOL no. You are out of school for two weeks full stop. It doesn't matter if you test again and it is negative.

Wow. So better not to risk a test unless you have symptoms or a known exposure.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
The families are refusing to attend in person. Would you round them up and march them in forcibly?

Who is refusing to attend in person school? Why couldn’t they do Friendship? Or homeschool? Why did the school think it was wise to appease the DLers?

Are you nuts?
Good on KIPP for caring for their students and planning enough ahead to be DL-ready for the coming school year.

Are you an abusive troll?

I asked a straightforward question. Is there a group of parents refusing to go in to a school and somehow bending the arm of the school to provide DL? Why is that a bizarre question to answer?

1. No, "why did the school think it was wise to appease the DLers?" is not a straightforward question.
2. Considering the mission of KIPP and its population, it was totally unreasonable to suggest they homeschool.
Both statements were abusive and trolly.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
The families are refusing to attend in person. Would you round them up and march them in forcibly?

Who is refusing to attend in person school? Why couldn’t they do Friendship? Or homeschool? Why did the school think it was wise to appease the DLers?

Are you nuts?
Good on KIPP for caring for their students and planning enough ahead to be DL-ready for the coming school year.

Are you an abusive troll?

I asked a straightforward question. Is there a group of parents refusing to go in to a school and somehow bending the arm of the school to provide DL? Why is that a bizarre question to answer?

1. No, "why did the school think it was wise to appease the DLers?" is not a straightforward question.
2. Considering the mission of KIPP and its population, it was totally unreasonable to suggest they homeschool.
Both statements were abusive and trolly.

You aren't providing any context and are assuming that anyone knows what you are talking about. There's no context that it's KIPP that you're talking about in the original post about "rounding them up and marching them in forcibly" (note your language there --- a bit exaggerated, no?). Second, there's no context as to what is happening at KIPP (if that's what you're talking about) -- did KIPP do a poll of parents and 95% of them said "we are not coming in, no matter what"? Is there a small percentage of parents who want DL? Since TEACHERS complained all last year of the difficulties of providing DL, one would think that a school that wishes to maintain teachers wouldn't hurt them unnecessarily. How did KIPP's negotiations with its teachers work out so that it made sense to ignore them?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If the city could manage false positives better, then I would opt in to testing. But this spring showed us that it can’t. So nope, they won’t be testing my kid again.

what happened with the false positive? a long time out of school?

Good question. Can’t you just test again?

LOL no. You are out of school for two weeks full stop. It doesn't matter if you test again and it is negative.

Wow. So better not to risk a test unless you have symptoms or a known exposure.

Particularly since asymptomatic testing has a higher likelihood of false positives. Let's not even get started on testing of the vaccinated.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If the city could manage false positives better, then I would opt in to testing. But this spring showed us that it can’t. So nope, they won’t be testing my kid again.

what happened with the false positive? a long time out of school?

Good question. Can’t you just test again?

LOL no. You are out of school for two weeks full stop. It doesn't matter if you test again and it is negative.

Wow. So better not to risk a test unless you have symptoms or a known exposure.

Particularly since asymptomatic testing has a higher likelihood of false positives. Let's not even get started on testing of the vaccinated.

That is NOT TRUE.
Asymptomatic testing using the take-home rapid tests has a very high likelihood of false negatives.
Labs have adjusted the number of cycles in PCR so that those no longer produce false positive.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If the city could manage false positives better, then I would opt in to testing. But this spring showed us that it can’t. So nope, they won’t be testing my kid again.

what happened with the false positive? a long time out of school?

Good question. Can’t you just test again?

LOL no. You are out of school for two weeks full stop. It doesn't matter if you test again and it is negative.

Wow. So better not to risk a test unless you have symptoms or a known exposure.

Particularly since asymptomatic testing has a higher likelihood of false positives. Let's not even get started on testing of the vaccinated.

That is NOT TRUE.
Asymptomatic testing using the take-home rapid tests has a very high likelihood of false negatives.
Labs have adjusted the number of cycles in PCR so that those no longer produce false positive.

Rapid at home tests provide 17% of the time false positives.

https://www.cochrane.org/CD013705/INFECTN_how-accurate-are-rapid-tests-diagnosing-covid-19

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If the city could manage false positives better, then I would opt in to testing. But this spring showed us that it can’t. So nope, they won’t be testing my kid again.

what happened with the false positive? a long time out of school?

Good question. Can’t you just test again?

LOL no. You are out of school for two weeks full stop. It doesn't matter if you test again and it is negative.

Wow. So better not to risk a test unless you have symptoms or a known exposure.

Particularly since asymptomatic testing has a higher likelihood of false positives. Let's not even get started on testing of the vaccinated.

That is NOT TRUE.
Asymptomatic testing using the take-home rapid tests has a very high likelihood of false negatives.
Labs have adjusted the number of cycles in PCR so that those no longer produce false positive.

Rapid at home tests provide 17% of the time false positives.

https://www.cochrane.org/CD013705/INFECTN_how-accurate-are-rapid-tests-diagnosing-covid-19

In the linked study:

In people who did not have COVID-19, antigen tests correctly ruled out infection in 99.5% of people with symptoms and 98.9% of people without symptoms.
Different brands of tests varied in accuracy. Pooled results for one test (SD Biosensor STANDARD Q) met World Health Organization (WHO) standards as ‘acceptable’ for confirming and ruling out COVID-19 in people with signs and symptoms of COVID-19. Two more tests met the WHO acceptable standards (Abbott Panbio and BIONOTE NowCheck) in at least one study.

Your 17% is for SD Biosensor, which is the only brand they chose to describe. In the summary quoted above, however, antigen tests correctly ruled out infection in 99.5% of people with symptoms and 98.9% of people without.

[Anonymous]

DP. but perhaps a more useful study showing that when prevalence rates are low you can get a large number of false positives even with relatively precise tests.

https://asm.org/Articles/2020/November/SARS-CoV-2-Testing-Sensitivity-Is-Not-the-Whole-St

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:DP. but perhaps a more useful study showing that when prevalence rates are low you can get a large number of false positives even with relatively precise tests.

https://asm.org/Articles/2020/November/SARS-CoV-2-Testing-Sensitivity-Is-Not-the-Whole-St

This. This is why universal asymptomatic testing in our schools probably does more harm than good, especially if every “positive” entails a two week quarantine.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:DP. but perhaps a more useful study showing that when prevalence rates are low you can get a large number of false positives even with relatively precise tests.

https://asm.org/Articles/2020/November/SARS-CoV-2-Testing-Sensitivity-Is-Not-the-Whole-St

This. This is why universal asymptomatic testing in our schools probably does more harm than good, especially if every “positive” entails a two week quarantine.

yep. I’m thinking about opting out now.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:DP. but perhaps a more useful study showing that when prevalence rates are low you can get a large number of false positives even with relatively precise tests.

https://asm.org/Articles/2020/November/SARS-CoV-2-Testing-Sensitivity-Is-Not-the-Whole-St

This. This is why universal asymptomatic testing in our schools probably does more harm than good, especially if every “positive” entails a two week quarantine.

yep. I’m thinking about opting out now.

Opting out of what? There is no plan for asymptomatic testing this year. DCPS isn't going to care about covid until your kids schools start to get it anyway. If kids or adults east of the river are getting sick, it's not going to matter, be sure that is how DC politics work.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:DP. but perhaps a more useful study showing that when prevalence rates are low you can get a large number of false positives even with relatively precise tests.

https://asm.org/Articles/2020/November/SARS-CoV-2-Testing-Sensitivity-Is-Not-the-Whole-St

This. This is why universal asymptomatic testing in our schools probably does more harm than good, especially if every “positive” entails a two week quarantine.

yep. I’m thinking about opting out now.

Opting out of what? There is no plan for asymptomatic testing this year. DCPS isn't going to care about covid until your kids schools start to get it anyway. If kids or adults east of the river are getting sick, it's not going to matter, be sure that is how DC politics work.

Just because the plan hasn’t been announced doesn’t mean it doesn’t exist. I’m assuming that it’s likely DCPS will do the surveillance asymptomatic testing like they did last year, plus rapid tests for symptoms that show up in school. If they do pooled testing where any positives are retested, I would probably be ok with that.

And the whole “DCPS has no plaaaannn!!” thing is 100% part of the WTU playbook during negotiations (which are currently ongoing.) I’m not falling for it. DCPS has shown to me it’s managing covid well. Yes there are things I would like to see improved but I have no overall concerns and feel confident in them.