CPS cancels school after CTU voted to only work remotely

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Seriously. Where is the damn money. This is ridiculous.

About the money......This is maddening and exactly why many of us were against the Covid relief. More examples in the article linked.

They got the money. Yet this month, schools in numerous districts will be closed, citing an inability to deal with the Omicron variant, despite receiving money that could have gone towards mitigation, protection, and preventative measures. That, it turns out, could be in part due to a bait-and-switch, with money passed into law under the guise of public health being used for racial ideology instead.

In August, the Department of Education published strategies for using the money. “Rebuilding from COVID-19 is an opportunity,” the document said, for a “culture shift” and the “establishment of equitable practices… One example of how a district is using a performance assessment in a culturally and linguistically responsive way is the Chicago Public School’s Curriculum Equity Initiative.”

Chicago earmarked $32 million of ARP money to a “comprehensive, culturally responsive curriculum” developed “through the Curriculum Equity Initiative.” The union is voting Tuesday on whether to switch to remote learning.

Milwaukee allocated $24 million of its ARP money to “Social Emotional Learning,” including $100,000 for “Anti-Racism and Bias Professional Development.” It will not be conducting classes in person until at least January 10.

A review of the proposals submitted by states and approved by the federal government shows that their plans for supposed coronavirus money are littered with CRT-infused ideas. For example:

California earmarked $1.5 billion to provide school districts with “training resources for classified, certificated, and administrative school staff in specified high-need topics, including accelerated learning, re-engaging students, restorative practices, and implicit bias training.”

New York’s relief plan said it believed “opportunities to learn are greatly expanded for all students when strong principles of diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI) are present and operative in a district or school.” It referenced teaching students about “privilege” and “their identities.”

This filtered down into local school districts. The Corning-Painted Post School District said it would use ARP money to pay the Equity Collaborative, a consultant best known for its work in Loudoun County, Virginia, and which preaches the “5 tenets of critical race theory.”

Buffalo Public Schools said it would spend $1.2 million of the money on its Office of Culturally & Linguistically Responsive Initiatives, including hiring staff for “anti-racism” and for “emancipation curriculum materials.” Fox reported in 2020 that the emancipation curriculum advocates to elementary school students “the disruption of Western nuclear family dynamics” in favor of “Black Villages.”

Michigan promoted using an “equity lens” to apportion money, including spending it on “professional development for all staff members in social emotional learning, trauma-informed care, and implicit bias.”

https://www.dailywire.com/news/schools-got-130b-to-re-open-some-of-it-went-to-crt-now-many-are-closed

Wow, really?

In summary: We're now at the point where one can no longer teach that racism and bias are bad because that's "evil CRT."

Right wing media is truly off the deep end.

Ok, Francis.......

The point is these schools used COVID RELIEF FUNDING to implement the stupid "restorative justice" curriculum.
How in the HELL does that have anything to do with helping schools get their buildings safe for students?????

And then they claim they can’t keep schools safe so close up which hurts the poor black and brown kids the most. The very people they claimed to be trying to save.

One side is truly “off the deep end” and it ain’t the republicans.

[Anonymous]

“When these kids aren’t in school,
they’re on the streets getting shot at.”

Shame on these public school teachers.
Stop paying them for staying home.
Give poor families real school choice.

This is the only solution.

[Anonymous]

This seems like a good place for this article. It seems like the Democratic Party has their head in the sand that continued covid “mitigation” like virtual school isn’t going to cost them dearly in upcoming elections, to include the presidency. God forbid Trump run again.

https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2022/01/democrats-botched-public-school-covid-policy/621183/

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:This seems like a good place for this article. It seems like the Democratic Party has their head in the sand that continued covid “mitigation” like virtual school isn’t going to cost them dearly in upcoming elections, to include the presidency. God forbid Trump run again.

https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2022/01/democrats-botched-public-school-covid-policy/621183/

This is great. I'm still reading it but this is a great paragraph:

"Many liberals and institutional leaders thought that no one could fault them for being too cautious, especially when it came to children. But I can, and I do. The University of Oxford medical ethicist Euzebiusz Jamrozik said recently on a podcast that ethical public-health responses must rely on a few key principles. One of those is “proportionality,” meaning that the intervention must be proportionate to the risk. A Bloomberg article noted in March that children in the U.S. were about 10 times as likely to be killed in a car crash as by COVID-19. Closing school for more than a year was disproportionate the same way that forbidding parents to drive would have been."

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Seriously. Where is the damn money. This is ridiculous.

About the money......This is maddening and exactly why many of us were against the Covid relief. More examples in the article linked.

They got the money. Yet this month, schools in numerous districts will be closed, citing an inability to deal with the Omicron variant, despite receiving money that could have gone towards mitigation, protection, and preventative measures. That, it turns out, could be in part due to a bait-and-switch, with money passed into law under the guise of public health being used for racial ideology instead.

In August, the Department of Education published strategies for using the money. “Rebuilding from COVID-19 is an opportunity,” the document said, for a “culture shift” and the “establishment of equitable practices… One example of how a district is using a performance assessment in a culturally and linguistically responsive way is the Chicago Public School’s Curriculum Equity Initiative.”

Chicago earmarked $32 million of ARP money to a “comprehensive, culturally responsive curriculum” developed “through the Curriculum Equity Initiative.” The union is voting Tuesday on whether to switch to remote learning.

Milwaukee allocated $24 million of its ARP money to “Social Emotional Learning,” including $100,000 for “Anti-Racism and Bias Professional Development.” It will not be conducting classes in person until at least January 10.

A review of the proposals submitted by states and approved by the federal government shows that their plans for supposed coronavirus money are littered with CRT-infused ideas. For example:

California earmarked $1.5 billion to provide school districts with “training resources for classified, certificated, and administrative school staff in specified high-need topics, including accelerated learning, re-engaging students, restorative practices, and implicit bias training.”

New York’s relief plan said it believed “opportunities to learn are greatly expanded for all students when strong principles of diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI) are present and operative in a district or school.” It referenced teaching students about “privilege” and “their identities.”

This filtered down into local school districts. The Corning-Painted Post School District said it would use ARP money to pay the Equity Collaborative, a consultant best known for its work in Loudoun County, Virginia, and which preaches the “5 tenets of critical race theory.”

Buffalo Public Schools said it would spend $1.2 million of the money on its Office of Culturally & Linguistically Responsive Initiatives, including hiring staff for “anti-racism” and for “emancipation curriculum materials.” Fox reported in 2020 that the emancipation curriculum advocates to elementary school students “the disruption of Western nuclear family dynamics” in favor of “Black Villages.”

Michigan promoted using an “equity lens” to apportion money, including spending it on “professional development for all staff members in social emotional learning, trauma-informed care, and implicit bias.”

https://www.dailywire.com/news/schools-got-130b-to-re-open-some-of-it-went-to-crt-now-many-are-closed

Wow, really?

In summary: We're now at the point where one can no longer teach that racism and bias are bad because that's "evil CRT."

Right wing media is truly off the deep end.

Hard to tell if you are playing dumb here.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This seems like a good place for this article. It seems like the Democratic Party has their head in the sand that continued covid “mitigation” like virtual school isn’t going to cost them dearly in upcoming elections, to include the presidency. God forbid Trump run again.

https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2022/01/democrats-botched-public-school-covid-policy/621183/

This is great. I'm still reading it but this is a great paragraph:

"Many liberals and institutional leaders thought that no one could fault them for being too cautious, especially when it came to children. But I can, and I do. The University of Oxford medical ethicist Euzebiusz Jamrozik said recently on a podcast that ethical public-health responses must rely on a few key principles. One of those is “proportionality,” meaning that the intervention must be proportionate to the risk. A Bloomberg article noted in March that children in the U.S. were about 10 times as likely to be killed in a car crash as by COVID-19. Closing school for more than a year was disproportionate the same way that forbidding parents to drive would have been."

A succinct way to capture so much of the Covid hysteria. Yes Covid is a serious threat, but no, that doesn't mean we just shut our brains down when someone says the word "Covid."

We have known kids were at little risk from Covid since the early days of the pandemic. Much of the world kept their schools open throughout the pandemic and demonstrated that the risks of doing so were small and manageable.

Meanwhile we have some in the US that are -still- trying to shut schools down, and many of the most vocal are the teachers and school administrators themselves.

What happened to following the "science?" These people need to stop the stupidity and get on the right side of this issue.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This seems like a good place for this article. It seems like the Democratic Party has their head in the sand that continued covid “mitigation” like virtual school isn’t going to cost them dearly in upcoming elections, to include the presidency. God forbid Trump run again.

https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2022/01/democrats-botched-public-school-covid-policy/621183/

This is great. I'm still reading it but this is a great paragraph:

"Many liberals and institutional leaders thought that no one could fault them for being too cautious, especially when it came to children. But I can, and I do. The University of Oxford medical ethicist Euzebiusz Jamrozik said recently on a podcast that ethical public-health responses must rely on a few key principles. One of those is “proportionality,” meaning that the intervention must be proportionate to the risk. A Bloomberg article noted in March that children in the U.S. were about 10 times as likely to be killed in a car crash as by COVID-19. Closing school for more than a year was disproportionate the same way that forbidding parents to drive would have been."

Closing schools for a year wasn't about the kids dying in the car crash though. It was about the parents, grandparents, and caregivers. How do you not understand than an orphaned-but-educated child is not better off than a uneducated-but-at home child?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This seems like a good place for this article. It seems like the Democratic Party has their head in the sand that continued covid “mitigation” like virtual school isn’t going to cost them dearly in upcoming elections, to include the presidency. God forbid Trump run again.

https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2022/01/democrats-botched-public-school-covid-policy/621183/

This is great. I'm still reading it but this is a great paragraph:

"Many liberals and institutional leaders thought that no one could fault them for being too cautious, especially when it came to children. But I can, and I do. The University of Oxford medical ethicist Euzebiusz Jamrozik said recently on a podcast that ethical public-health responses must rely on a few key principles. One of those is “proportionality,” meaning that the intervention must be proportionate to the risk. A Bloomberg article noted in March that children in the U.S. were about 10 times as likely to be killed in a car crash as by COVID-19. Closing school for more than a year was disproportionate the same way that forbidding parents to drive would have been."

Closing schools for a year wasn't about the kids dying in the car crash though. It was about the parents, grandparents, and caregivers. How do you not understand than an orphaned-but-educated child is not better off than a uneducated-but-at home child?

This right here is EXACTLY what I’m taking about. These statistics about “a leading cause of death” in young people so misleading. I saw an article that was titled something like “COVID the 6th leading cause of death in children”. Um yeah, because it is generally very rare for children to die. You should read the Atlantic article because it actually talks quite a bit about democrats misconstruing the risk through these misleading “fact” to convince people that schools closures were and continue be the right decision. It is well documented that democrats have continues to over-sell how risky covid is, especially now that people who want to be vaccinated, are. It’s going to lose you votes. Maybe you don’t care about votes because you think you’re saving lives by closing schools, but trump being president again is a very real risk you’re taking.

[Anonymous]

Wonder if Starbucks asked their employees if they would like to come to work or stay home and get paid--what the vote would be?

This is the equivalent of a strike and should be treated as such.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Wonder if Starbucks asked their employees if they would like to come to work or stay home and get paid--what the vote would be?

This is the equivalent of a strike and should be treated as such.

Starbucks doesn't even allow in-restaurant dining anymore. I went in to get a vanilla latte and they had little signs up on every table to that seating was 'closed'. It was get your drink and go.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This seems like a good place for this article. It seems like the Democratic Party has their head in the sand that continued covid “mitigation” like virtual school isn’t going to cost them dearly in upcoming elections, to include the presidency. God forbid Trump run again.

https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2022/01/democrats-botched-public-school-covid-policy/621183/

This is great. I'm still reading it but this is a great paragraph:

"Many liberals and institutional leaders thought that no one could fault them for being too cautious, especially when it came to children. But I can, and I do. The University of Oxford medical ethicist Euzebiusz Jamrozik said recently on a podcast that ethical public-health responses must rely on a few key principles. One of those is “proportionality,” meaning that the intervention must be proportionate to the risk. A Bloomberg article noted in March that children in the U.S. were about 10 times as likely to be killed in a car crash as by COVID-19. Closing school for more than a year was disproportionate the same way that forbidding parents to drive would have been."

Closing schools for a year wasn't about the kids dying in the car crash though. It was about the parents, grandparents, and caregivers. How do you not understand than an orphaned-but-educated child is not better off than a uneducated-but-at home child?

Name another time in history where children were sacrificed for the benefit of adults. The old saying "women and children first!" while outdated, was to allow children the best chance of survival. But Democrats decided with COVID that children needed to be shoved aside or used as meat shields. Closing schools, outdoor playgrounds (!!), outdoor sports.
History is not going to look kindly on the people that caused such trauma to a generation of children to save the old.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This seems like a good place for this article. It seems like the Democratic Party has their head in the sand that continued covid “mitigation” like virtual school isn’t going to cost them dearly in upcoming elections, to include the presidency. God forbid Trump run again.

https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2022/01/democrats-botched-public-school-covid-policy/621183/

This is great. I'm still reading it but this is a great paragraph:

"Many liberals and institutional leaders thought that no one could fault them for being too cautious, especially when it came to children. But I can, and I do. The University of Oxford medical ethicist Euzebiusz Jamrozik said recently on a podcast that ethical public-health responses must rely on a few key principles. One of those is “proportionality,” meaning that the intervention must be proportionate to the risk. A Bloomberg article noted in March that children in the U.S. were about 10 times as likely to be killed in a car crash as by COVID-19. Closing school for more than a year was disproportionate the same way that forbidding parents to drive would have been."

Closing schools for a year wasn't about the kids dying in the car crash though. It was about the parents, grandparents, and caregivers. How do you not understand than an orphaned-but-educated child is not better off than a uneducated-but-at home child?

Name another time in history where children were sacrificed for the benefit of adults. The old saying "women and children first!" while outdated, was to allow children the best chance of survival. But Democrats decided with COVID that children needed to be shoved aside or used as meat shields. Closing schools, outdoor playgrounds (!!), outdoor sports.
History is not going to look kindly on the people that caused such trauma to a generation of children to save the old.

Name another time in history where children were sacrificed for the benefit of adults. The old saying "women and children first!" while outdated, was to allow children the best chance of survival. But Democrats decided with COVID that children needed to be shoved aside or used as meat shields. Closing schools, outdoor playgrounds (!!), outdoor sports.
History is not going to look kindly on the people that caused such trauma to a generation of children to save the old.

[Anonymous]

Very few children die in this country as has been stated. If 200 die a year from the flu and 400 die a year from COVID, it may be the leading cause, but it is still an infinitesimally small risk.

There have been 832 pediatric deaths from COVID so far in the US according to the CDC. How many of those were actually preventable with greater restrictions and controls? I can't say.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Wonder if Starbucks asked their employees if they would like to come to work or stay home and get paid--what the vote would be?

This is the equivalent of a strike and should be treated as such.

Starbucks doesn't even allow in-restaurant dining anymore. I went in to get a vanilla latte and they had little signs up on every table to that seating was 'closed'. It was get your drink and go.

Not in McLean. The high school kids have taken it over for the last five days.

[Anonymous]

Why is there a graphic about young adults age 25-44 on a discussion about schoolchildren. I am so sick of deflection.