Ironic isn't it? Liberals who don't care about education, children, or working families. They have put the public health bueracracy and teachers unions on a pedestal and don't give a s**t about you or your kids. -A Democrat |
Yep, the virtual crowd won. MCPS manufactured a system to backdoor into virtual. |
Based on real-time, school-level case counts. Some backdoor. |
Based on unverified, self-reported case counts. |
This is a joke. We are relying on imperfect data (parent self-report). Parents who are unable to secure home tests or get tested aren't able to report + cases. Many parents purposely will not report to avoid school quarantine. What a mess. |
I think I am at that school too. I find it highly suspicious that we have only had 5 cases all year and that we are less than 1.5% positivity. |
Rich people test more? |
I don't see it that way. If anything, it will discourage people from reporting so we will have lower estimates to keep schools open |
Yep, they were able to get their hands on more tests, actually afford RATs, and probably travelled over break so tested more. |
I agree, but you only need 5% to flip it. Whatever side you're on, this is literally an insane way of going about this. |
I don't know what to think honestly. On the one hand, I am very angry and am tempted to view this as a backdoor way to close schools while they say they are keeping them open. On the other hand, I like to think MCPS has gotten the message that schools need to be open and will realize in a couple of weeks this system is flawed and figure a way to pivot out of it. Arbitrary metrics for closing make no sense as they do not take into account changing information and the fact that this variant is no worse for children than other variants. |
It cannot be implemented. Schools will be flip flopping between virtual and in person constantly. |
What does this mean? People who "pressed for" schools to go virtual by these 5% metrics that were set weeks (months?) ago? Or people who "pressed" for virtual to ever be an option, instead of "Oh well, too bad, doesn't matter if 100% of people have COVID, your only option is in-person? This is some weird twisting of logic. A couple of weeks ago, before break, most people weren't paying all that much attention to this. They weren't too heated because they hoped or assumed the rate wouldn't rise above 5%. Now nothing has changed except the rate has increased, quite predictably. But the anger at having to go virtual is being aimed at people who didn't influence the development of the metric at all. I want my kid's school to go virtual for 2-4 weeks, given the circumstances at the moment. But I had no influence on creating this policy, nor did I help to spread COVID, because we haven't been anywhere in weeks except to visit only my very COVID conservative parents, stay inside their house, and return right after. How is someone like me responsible for any of this? Did I will it to happen? |
5% of unrelated cases, and reliance on parental self report and/or shabby testing. Policy decisions need to be made using "robust" data. Right now we don't have that so everyone, regardless of perspective, is pissed off. |