Tell me again why we aren’t opening elementary schools in at least a hybrid format?

[Anonymous]

New data on child care centers. 57,000 providers. No increased COVID-19 risk of providing care in person.

https://pediatrics.aappublications.org/content/pediatrics/early/2020/10/12/peds.2020-031971.full.pdf

[Anonymous]

Lack of political will and continued ability to make mothers and poor people bear the burderns, and a culture that does not actually care about children.

[Anonymous]

Because the hybrid model is a joke for everyone. 2 days on 3 days off? School every Other week? nothing on the off days- sounds dreamy.

[Anonymous]

Hybrid is not logistically feasible.

[Anonymous]

Because child care providers are not teachers. Because the idea that a teacher can simultaneously provide quality DL and quality in-peraon is a joke.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Hybrid is not logistically feasible.

This. Hybrid is possible for small private schools but not for big school systems.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Hybrid is not logistically feasible.

This. Hybrid is possible for small private schools but not for big school systems.

Except NYC is doing it and has been for about a month. Manhattan schools are still open in the hybrid model. Their buildings and HVAC are old and their teachers are unionized. I really hope the November 9th opening happens and expands from there.

[Anonymous]

But who says that hybrid means a teacher needs to teach a virtual and in-person simultaneously? Why are you assuming that's the case? Because it's convenient for your case?

[Anonymous]

Op here - I said “at least” hybrid.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:But who says that hybrid means a teacher needs to teach a virtual and in-person simultaneously? Why are you assuming that's the case? Because it's convenient for your case?

Because that's how it's laid out. What would you have the kids do the other 2 days a week ?

[Anonymous]

Sigh....

We can make schools better and safer but that won't change the health conditions of people.

The government isn't going to suddenly ban fast food and force people to move more. If we are being honest most disease is from poor eating and lack of movement. Obesity is also a factor in being more susceptible.

If you actually look at trends in places re-opening you'll notice their obesity rates are much lower as well as their rates of people with comorbidities.

So, it's easier to just say teachers are babies than really examine why we could possible be in this situation. Germany's obesity rate is about 22% Average being 26 (which isn't obese by US standards) The average for DC is 50% YES, you read correctly FIFTY PERCENT. AND in ward 7 and 8 is 75%!!!

This is not a joke.
https://dchealth.dc.gov/service/obesity-overview
https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world...ctbook/rankorder/2228rank.html (older but I wanted to use a gov agency)

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Sigh....

We can make schools better and safer but that won't change the health conditions of people.

The government isn't going to suddenly ban fast food and force people to move more. If we are being honest most disease is from poor eating and lack of movement. Obesity is also a factor in being more susceptible.

If you actually look at trends in places re-opening you'll notice their obesity rates are much lower as well as their rates of people with comorbidities.

So, it's easier to just say teachers are babies than really examine why we could possible be in this situation. Germany's obesity rate is about 22% Average being 26 (which isn't obese by US standards) The average for DC is 50% YES, you read correctly FIFTY PERCENT. AND in ward 7 and 8 is 75%!!!

This is not a joke.
https://dchealth.dc.gov/service/obesity-overview
https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world...ctbook/rankorder/2228rank.html (older but I wanted to use a gov agency)

That is a pretty valid argument. The real reason is that Bowser is part of the DNC and not permitted to make it happen until after the election.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:But who says that hybrid means a teacher needs to teach a virtual and in-person simultaneously? Why are you assuming that's the case? Because it's convenient for your case?

Because that's how it's laid out. What would you have the kids do the other 2 days a week ?

Because anything else would just be part-time school. There is no way to have twice as many teachers and that is what you would need. I could get by with 3 days a week completely asynchronous, but on a policy level I don't think it's very good.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:But who says that hybrid means a teacher needs to teach a virtual and in-person simultaneously? Why are you assuming that's the case? Because it's convenient for your case?

Because that's how it's laid out. What would you have the kids do the other 2 days a week ?

Because anything else would just be part-time school. There is no way to have twice as many teachers and that is what you would need. I could get by with 3 days a week completely asynchronous, but on a policy level I don't think it's very good.

I mean, that might work for a 5th grader, but a 6 year old isn't going to learn with 3 days or asychronous. Basically the teacher has to teach both groups at the same time or it's part time school.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:But who says that hybrid means a teacher needs to teach a virtual and in-person simultaneously? Why are you assuming that's the case? Because it's convenient for your case?

Because that's how it's laid out. What would you have the kids do the other 2 days a week ?

asynchronous work. it’s not that hard to figure out!