Lack of a Plan Says It All

[Anonymous]

I’m still lost on why travel is something to punish. No one anywhere is saying that travel (at least within the US) is driving cases. This may have been true in spring 2920, but it is no longer true. Inside dining, whether in dc or out of state, is spreading cases. So are other indoor activities with a lot of people or unmasked people. I honestly would be fine adhering to the travel restrictions if DC were creating a super safe bubble around my family. But they are not.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I’m still lost on why travel is something to punish. No one anywhere is saying that travel (at least within the US) is driving cases. This may have been true in spring 2920, but it is no longer true. Inside dining, whether in dc or out of state, is spreading cases. So are other indoor activities with a lot of people or unmasked people. I honestly would be fine adhering to the travel restrictions if DC were creating a super safe bubble around my family. But they are not.

And the elephant in the room: the unvaccinated. The unvaccinated are driving cases, and will be driving cases for kids too young to be vaccinated.

[Anonymous]

The messaging from the Murch principal is confusing.

"As a note, there is no virtual instruction available for students who are quarantining due to travel."

then

"We have not yet decided about virtual instruction for students who will be on quarantine."

https://murchschool.org/update-august-5th/

[Anonymous]

Do they have a policy for vaccinated kids if an unvaccinated student has it? Will vaccinated students have to quarantine?

[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:Our ES said that there will be no virtual instruction for kids who are quarantined. I don't know if that's a district wide decision or just this school.

Which school

Lafayette

Really? From their website:
On Sunday, August 8th I will be sending out our official welcome back email with a full list of our COVID protocols, as well as class lists, signups for room parents, the school year calendar of events, and other exciting information! Be on the lookout for that email!

I know it’s the 8th….. but I didn’t get that email yet. I suspect trolling.

she sent a follow up that class lists are under construction. and to the PPs point. Dr B said there will be no virtual instruction for kids who quarantine for travel. she said nothing about what happens with a positive case.

No, she said no instruction whatsoever.

I'm not even a Lafayette parent, and I could see it :
https://www.lafayettehsa.org/mid-summer-updates/
"As a note, there is no virtual instruction available for students who are quarantining due to travel."

Right. The point is, "we're not going to make our teachers do backflips and do both online and in class teaching because you went to OBX."

This is not applicable to positive cases - still waiting on that....

But what if your kid was just exposed, even though you didn't travel? Teachers apparently aren't going to "do backflips" for those kids either, and they are just SOL.

We don't know yet, do we. The guidance above was just about travel.

Why make a distinction between the two?

Good grief, PP, you are struggling.

1) Because DCPS hasn't issued its instructions yet to schools about virtual learning for positive tests.
2) Because people can control their travel. For a school like Lafayette which is huge and has a demographic where people take nice vacations out of the area, they are saying they are not going to give your kid special schooling because you travelled the last week before school. The take away is: Follow the travel restrictions or expect your kid to miss school.

No, I am not. I do not know what the guidance will be, but I can't see why there would be a difference in the offering of virtual or other instruction between a child who was potentially exposed locally and a child who was potentially exposed during travel except for punitive reasons.

Let's assume there is some framework for providing instruction at all to a child that was exposed locally, when a whole class does not need to be quarantined. Two children are exposed on the same day.

Child A is exposed locally. This child is under 12 and unvaccinated. Presumably the child is not personally at fault for the exposure. The parents do the right thing and quarantine the child at home. Child receives some sort of instruction (virtual? packets? I do not know), because there is a framework to do so.

Child B is exposed during travel. This child is also under 12 and unvaccinated. As children this young typically do not make decisions to travel, the child is presumably not at fault for the exposure. The parents do the right thing and quarantine the child at home. Child does not receive any sort of instruction, despite the fact that there is a framework to do so.

Child B will be quarantined in any case; the parents will "have to" do child care whether or not the child receives instruction. In this scenario, not providing instruction hurts only the child and not the apparently bad and wrong parents who traveled.

Such a policy would not punish bad-behaving parents. It would punish children.

Don't be so obtuse. The point of this was to discourage travel. The end.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The messaging from the Murch principal is confusing.

"As a note, there is no virtual instruction available for students who are quarantining due to travel."

then

"We have not yet decided about virtual instruction for students who will be on quarantine."

https://murchschool.org/update-august-5th/

Right - people who choose to travel will not get extra resources because of that choice. This has nothing to do with whether a person has covid or not, is has to do with resource allocation.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I’m still lost on why travel is something to punish. No one anywhere is saying that travel (at least within the US) is driving cases. This may have been true in spring 2920, but it is no longer true. Inside dining, whether in dc or out of state, is spreading cases. So are other indoor activities with a lot of people or unmasked people. I honestly would be fine adhering to the travel restrictions if DC were creating a super safe bubble around my family. But they are not.

Control. People are feeling out of control and looking to punish others. There is no policy justification for it. It's all emotional.

[Anonymous]

Guys, the difference for treatment is because there isnt going to be a virtual option when it’s a single student at home. Classes aren’t set-up for hybrid virtual and in-person. The teacher is either in person or virtual. The class isn’t going to go virtual because one person traveled. If there is an in class positive case, then the entire class goes virtual, including the teacher. The thought process makes perfect sense and is completely practical, not punitive

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Guys, the difference for treatment is because there isnt going to be a virtual option when it’s a single student at home. Classes aren’t set-up for hybrid virtual and in-person. The teacher is either in person or virtual. The class isn’t going to go virtual because one person traveled. If there is an in class positive case, then the entire class goes virtual, including the teacher. The thought process makes perfect sense and is completely practical, not punitive

I understand why it's happening. I am hoping that teachers will at least send home packets if a kid is exposed. It even feels like you could get a laptop, point it at the teacher, and record the lesson and then send to the student.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Guys, the difference for treatment is because there isnt going to be a virtual option when it’s a single student at home. Classes aren’t set-up for hybrid virtual and in-person. The teacher is either in person or virtual. The class isn’t going to go virtual because one person traveled. If there is an in class positive case, then the entire class goes virtual, including the teacher. The thought process makes perfect sense and is completely practical, not punitive

I understand why it's happening. I am hoping that teachers will at least send home packets if a kid is exposed. It even feels like you could get a laptop, point it at the teacher, and record the lesson and then send to the student.

Lots of thorny legal issues with that. But at the most basic level, you would have to have every parent’s approval for their kid to be recorded (even if pointed at the teacher, you have kids speaking and being called by name etc). Inevitably, you will not get every parent’s consent and then you run into equity issues.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Guys, the difference for treatment is because there isnt going to be a virtual option when it’s a single student at home. Classes aren’t set-up for hybrid virtual and in-person. The teacher is either in person or virtual. The class isn’t going to go virtual because one person traveled. If there is an in class positive case, then the entire class goes virtual, including the teacher. The thought process makes perfect sense and is completely practical, not punitive

So what happens when a kid in your math class tests positive? Your math class is taught virtually, and you miss all your other classes?

[Anonymous]

Why is it so hard for some of you not to travel during the school year? I don’t get it. I could maybe understand it during the holidays, but that’s months away and the pandemic could look very different then. In normal times, are you really traveling that much during September, October? Is it that big of a deal to stay local on weekends? Jeez.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Why is it so hard for some of you not to travel during the school year? I don’t get it. I could maybe understand it during the holidays, but that’s months away and the pandemic could look very different then. In normal times, are you really traveling that much during September, October? Is it that big of a deal to stay local on weekends? Jeez.

That's a whole different discussion and one with many, many previous threads. Let's not beat that horse here please.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Why is it so hard for some of you not to travel during the school year? I don’t get it. I could maybe understand it during the holidays, but that’s months away and the pandemic could look very different then. In normal times, are you really traveling that much during September, October? Is it that big of a deal to stay local on weekends? Jeez.

Agree. It’s just silly.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why is it so hard for some of you not to travel during the school year? I don’t get it. I could maybe understand it during the holidays, but that’s months away and the pandemic could look very different then. In normal times, are you really traveling that much during September, October? Is it that big of a deal to stay local on weekends? Jeez.

Agree. It’s just silly.

The other thing is that unvaccinated teachers can't travel over those long weekends. Are they going to do that? Or do they take leave for the quarantine or what?