Has Duran gone mad? (APS)

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:AEA’s ultimate position is that there should be no in-person learning until the pandemic is declared fully over, even if that’s through next school year and beyond. They dress it up with a bunch of conditions that would need to be met, but every time APS approaches those goals, they just shift their position. This isn’t surprising, because AEA isn’t an education association, it’s an unofficial teachers union, so students and education aren’t their priority, the teachers are. This is also why AEA (like APE) doesn’t get to set the agenda, because they’re only looking out for one set of stakeholders and disregard the rest. Duran’s job is to balance the needs of all of the stakeholders, which means we’re going to end up with a compromise position that isn’t what anyone wants. The compromise is gong to happen regardless of how loud people scream, so the various groups can either accept that and take a seat at the table to help guide what it will look like, or they can be left out of the discussion.

Interesting.. not trying to be snarky, but at the end of the day, who is the taxpayer here? There is a certain responsibility to the taxpayers of the County that should take precedent. Otherwise, I see a series of lawsuits being filed.

Taxpayers are not shareholders, and you can’t think of APS the same as a private corporation. Taxpayers are not the only priority. I support rolling out hybrid, but yours is a fundamentally incorrect question.

Exactly. And what would the law suits be for? You are only obligated to an education. Not an in-person education. And that quality of education is subjective. The only lawsuits that could possibly be created are for students for special needs. And you know that county is trying to cover there a$$es there.

Where does it state that remote learning qualifies as a standard education? Sadly, I think there will be many more students with special needs and behavioral issues the longer remote learning remains.

Where does it say that in person is the standard, especially since this date does have a public online school? That is the problem when people say that there will be lawsuits.

This is just a silly argument. Nobody expected anything but an in-person learning when raising a family in Arlington.

I don’t think many people expected the U.S. would so completely botch its response to a pandemic, but here we are. APS is one of the best public school districts in the country and that is largely due to its amazing faculty. I am surprised so many members of the community would prefer to treat their best resource like cannon fodder to secure a short term interest, rather than give them the armor they need (safety measures and vaccines) to continue to serve the county’s interests.

Maybe there should be a gofundme to help raise funds for testing and ppe equipment.

Level 1 teachers who don’t have adequate PPE can request assistance from APE here:

http://arlingtonparentsforeducation.org/arlington-parents-for-education/our-advocacy/

[Anonymous]

Agree 100% that K-5 should be a go when rates drop a bit. 6-12 nope. APS didn’t cohort them. They could have, but they didn’t. And the virus properties indicate it is safer for 10 and under. Not MS and HS.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Agree 100% that K-5 should be a go when rates drop a bit. 6-12 nope. APS didn’t cohort them. They could have, but they didn’t. And the virus properties indicate it is safer for 10 and under. Not MS and HS.

I’m the PP who said the same thing. This is honest to god the only workable plan. But school boards and admin are terrified of the 6-12 backlash if they say so.

All kids deserve to be in school.
It is safe(enough) for elementary. It is not safe for MS/HS. Nobody in leadership is ready to call it like it is though.

Elementary could have been in all along but were held back because OLDER kids aren’t cohorted and spread it more like adults. It’s unfortunate.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Teacher safety should be everyone’s priority, not just AEA.

Safety isn’t a yes/no question, everyone has their own idea as to what’s safe enough. That’s what this debate is really about.

APS hasn't done much yet wrt to safety.

Where is the free testing for entrance & surveillance? Where are the air filters for every classroom? Where is the PPE?

Make some progress there and then we can talk.

There are tons of PPE sitting in every school right now, I can assure you. I know they are ordering more air filters, but not for every room, but rooms without windows.

You are “anonymous” so your assurances mean exactly nada.

DP. Do you evidence that pp is wrong? I’ve heard plenty from APS at school board meetings, on the website, etc., about the PPE and other safety equipment that’s been purchased and that they are continuing to purchase. Blanket claims that other people are wrong or lying isn’t very compelling without support for your position.

No, i don’t, but I also don’t have evidence to prove him right and it sounds like you don’t either. I really wish I could put complete faith and confidence in a statement or assurance made by anonymous, let alone a government official. Public health officials lost my trust with their “masks aren’t necessary” ploy last February, especially when there was plenty of evidence to disprove that.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:AEA’s ultimate position is that there should be no in-person learning until the pandemic is declared fully over, even if that’s through next school year and beyond. They dress it up with a bunch of conditions that would need to be met, but every time APS approaches those goals, they just shift their position. This isn’t surprising, because AEA isn’t an education association, it’s an unofficial teachers union, so students and education aren’t their priority, the teachers are. This is also why AEA (like APE) doesn’t get to set the agenda, because they’re only looking out for one set of stakeholders and disregard the rest. Duran’s job is to balance the needs of all of the stakeholders, which means we’re going to end up with a compromise position that isn’t what anyone wants. The compromise is gong to happen regardless of how loud people scream, so the various groups can either accept that and take a seat at the table to help guide what it will look like, or they can be left out of the discussion.

Interesting.. not trying to be snarky, but at the end of the day, who is the taxpayer here? There is a certain responsibility to the taxpayers of the County that should take precedent. Otherwise, I see a series of lawsuits being filed.

Taxpayers are not shareholders, and you can’t think of APS the same as a private corporation. Taxpayers are not the only priority. I support rolling out hybrid, but yours is a fundamentally incorrect question.

Exactly. And what would the law suits be for? You are only obligated to an education. Not an in-person education. And that quality of education is subjective. The only lawsuits that could possibly be created are for students for special needs. And you know that county is trying to cover there a$$es there.

Where does it state that remote learning qualifies as a standard education? Sadly, I think there will be many more students with special needs and behavioral issues the longer remote learning remains.

Where does it say that in person is the standard, especially since this date does have a public online school? That is the problem when people say that there will be lawsuits.

This is just a silly argument. Nobody expected anything but an in-person learning when raising a family in Arlington.

I don’t think many people expected the U.S. would so completely botch its response to a pandemic, but here we are. APS is one of the best public school districts in the country and that is largely due to its amazing faculty. I am surprised so many members of the community would prefer to treat their best resource like cannon fodder to secure a short term interest, rather than give them the armor they need (safety measures and vaccines) to continue to serve the county’s interests.

Maybe there should be a gofundme to help raise funds for testing and ppe equipment.

Level 1 teachers who don’t have adequate PPE can request assistance from APE here:

http://arlingtonparentsforeducation.org/arlington-parents-for-education/our-advocacy/

That is wonderful. I think APE would be more successful in its lobbying efforts if it foregrounded its efforts to be a support system for teachers. If I were a member, I would start trying to coordinate a fast track to teacher vaccination. If anyone has the contacts to make that happen, wouldn’t it be APS parents?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Agree 100% that K-5 should be a go when rates drop a bit. 6-12 nope. APS didn’t cohort them. They could have, but they didn’t. And the virus properties indicate it is safer for 10 and under. Not MS and HS.

I’m the PP who said the same thing. This is honest to god the only workable plan. But school boards and admin are terrified of the 6-12 backlash if they say so.

All kids deserve to be in school.
It is safe(enough) for elementary. It is not safe for MS/HS. Nobody in leadership is ready to call it like it is though.

Elementary could have been in all along but were held back because OLDER kids aren’t cohorted and spread it more like adults. It’s unfortunate.

Crab bucketing is what it is called. It makes me incredibly sad and pessimistic.
How much could be done if the school board could just sat “No mask exemptions whatsoever, no older kids in the buildings for the time being.”

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Safety measures will take place with masks, hand-washing and social distancing.. certainly enough to implement hybrid for the elementary students.

Nope. We also need testing and air filters.

It's crazy that the schools need to provide any of these - it should be the federal/state/local governments. They would have IF we didn't completely botch our response.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:AEA’s ultimate position is that there should be no in-person learning until the pandemic is declared fully over, even if that’s through next school year and beyond. They dress it up with a bunch of conditions that would need to be met, but every time APS approaches those goals, they just shift their position. This isn’t surprising, because AEA isn’t an education association, it’s an unofficial teachers union, so students and education aren’t their priority, the teachers are. This is also why AEA (like APE) doesn’t get to set the agenda, because they’re only looking out for one set of stakeholders and disregard the rest. Duran’s job is to balance the needs of all of the stakeholders, which means we’re going to end up with a compromise position that isn’t what anyone wants. The compromise is gong to happen regardless of how loud people scream, so the various groups can either accept that and take a seat at the table to help guide what it will look like, or they can be left out of the discussion.

Is this for real? Imagine if every county in the country had such insane demands.

No, it's not for real. That is probably the "moving the goalposts" poster who lives in an alternate reality.

The reality is that no one has implemented safety measures yet so APS schools can open safely. Not the federal government, not the state, not the county board, and not APS.

We need free, regular testing (entrance & surveillance), air filters for every classroom, PPE, etc.

Those are in the best interest of ALL stakeholders.

It is untrue that no safety measures have been implemented. There is a summary of the safety measures implemented for Level 1 on the APS website. You may not feel that the safety measures go far enough, but it is simply wrong to say there have been no safety measures implemented.

OK. I'll qualify that...

"The reality is that no one has implemented sufficient safety measures yet so APS schools can open safely."

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Teacher safety should be everyone’s priority, not just AEA.

Safety isn’t a yes/no question, everyone has their own idea as to what’s safe enough. That’s what this debate is really about.

APS hasn't done much yet wrt to safety.

Where is the free testing for entrance & surveillance? Where are the air filters for every classroom? Where is the PPE?

Make some progress there and then we can talk.

There are tons of PPE sitting in every school right now, I can assure you. I know they are ordering more air filters, but not for every room, but rooms without windows.

And testing? We *still* don't have adequate testing in the community, let alone for the schools. We need free entrance and surveillance testing for all in the schools.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Agree 100% that K-5 should be a go when rates drop a bit. 6-12 nope. APS didn’t cohort them. They could have, but they didn’t. And the virus properties indicate it is safer for 10 and under. Not MS and HS.

I’m the PP who said the same thing. This is honest to god the only workable plan. But school boards and admin are terrified of the 6-12 backlash if they say so.

All kids deserve to be in school.
It is safe(enough) for elementary. It is not safe for MS/HS. Nobody in leadership is ready to call it like it is though.

Elementary could have been in all along but were held back because OLDER kids aren’t cohorted and spread it more like adults. It’s unfortunate.

I don't think there will be a 6-12 backlash. Perhaps from 6th grade parents but most of the secondary students I know are trucking along and doing fine with the DL. I know there are some kids struggling, not anyone I actually know but what I read here, but most of the kids in our circle are pretty happy. They have great social networks and they also recognize that the health risk isn't worth it for them. The biggest things my older kids miss are the things like homecoming and prom because those are such big benchmarks for high school.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Agree 100% that K-5 should be a go when rates drop a bit. 6-12 nope. APS didn’t cohort them. They could have, but they didn’t. And the virus properties indicate it is safer for 10 and under. Not MS and HS.

I’m the PP who said the same thing. This is honest to god the only workable plan. But school boards and admin are terrified of the 6-12 backlash if they say so.

All kids deserve to be in school.
It is safe(enough) for elementary. It is not safe for MS/HS. Nobody in leadership is ready to call it like it is though.

Elementary could have been in all along but were held back because OLDER kids aren’t cohorted and spread it more like adults. It’s unfortunate.

Crab bucketing is what it is called. It makes me incredibly sad and pessimistic.
How much could be done if the school board could just sat “No mask exemptions whatsoever, no older kids in the buildings for the time being.”

+1

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Safety measures will take place with masks, hand-washing and social distancing.. certainly enough to implement hybrid for the elementary students.

Elementary really isn’t the issue. They’re small and truly cohorted. The issue nobody seems willing to accept the simplest and safest option is send k-5 and self contained sped students (with PPE and a stipend , and tell 6-12 the data doesn’t support their return. It just doesn’t. Maybe the bottom 2-5% of 6-12, those who won’t pass or graduate, could come in 2x a week for remediation with teachers who are okay going in. A full k-12 return is a stupid idea and won’t work but nobody seems willing to say 6-12 can’t make it work and let elementary go forward.

+1000 elementary is also suffering the most right now. Please please let the younger students return!!

[Anonymous]

I agree. But my middle school PTA parents will flip out. They seem utterly incapable of taking a systemic view. But, Duran should be able to do that. I really don’t know
Why that isn’t the approach.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Agree 100% that K-5 should be a go when rates drop a bit. 6-12 nope. APS didn’t cohort them. They could have, but they didn’t. And the virus properties indicate it is safer for 10 and under. Not MS and HS.

I’m the PP who said the same thing. This is honest to god the only workable plan. But school boards and admin are terrified of the 6-12 backlash if they say so.

All kids deserve to be in school.
It is safe(enough) for elementary. It is not safe for MS/HS. Nobody in leadership is ready to call it like it is though.

Elementary could have been in all along but were held back because OLDER kids aren’t cohorted and spread it more like adults. It’s unfortunate.

I don't think there will be a 6-12 backlash. Perhaps from 6th grade parents but most of the secondary students I know are trucking along and doing fine with the DL. I know there are some kids struggling, not anyone I actually know but what I read here, but most of the kids in our circle are pretty happy. They have great social networks and they also recognize that the health risk isn't worth it for them. The biggest things my older kids miss are the things like homecoming and prom because those are such big benchmarks for high school.

No: there’s always that one person who comes in and says suicide and self harm in teens are up because of school closures. Parents of 6-12 would never let go of the fact elementary went back and their kids didn’t even though we all know elementary is higher need and more vulnerable and less likely to spread the virus and that the MOST at risk high schoolers could qualify for remediation.

[Anonymous]

Does anyone know if there have been any outbreaks among the level 1 students and staff who were back in school?