New asymptomatic testing protocol

[Anonymous]

Looks like a recipe for disaster.

[Anonymous]

Disaster is a strong term, but I am disappointed that they won't be testing like they said. I will start testing my own kid at least every other week, as she would have been under the original plan.

[Anonymous]

(I apologize in advance, but it's "asymptomatic." The term "asymptotic" is mostly a math term.)

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:(I apologize in advance, but it's "asymptomatic." The term "asymptotic" is mostly a math term.)

ha ha ha yes.. I was wonderingContaxt Jeff via report button and ask him to fix typo as it is confusing.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Looks like a recipe for disaster.

How so? It seems like they're following solid guidelines. Adjusting these policies to be realistic is really important to a return to school for more kids.

[Anonymous]

DCPS sure knows how to put lipstick on a pig. They clearly couldn’t swing the bi-weekly testing with the outsourced team so they ditched it and spun it as an outcome of evolving CDC guidance with the warm, comforting school nurse now administering the test. I’m sick of the DCPS alternative facts (and my oldest kid is only in kindergarten - we have a long haul ahead of us).

[Anonymous]

I don’t think our school was doing the testing they were supposed to before this change in protocol.

[Anonymous]

There is a chance in 10 that we'll find out about a school outbreak, now.
I don't understand how they could play bait and switch to this extent in the middle of a term. I am so disgusted. The promise of testing each opted-in student every 10 days was a factor in the decision of many families whether to send their kids into school. What can they do now? Nothing at all. It's unethical to take away a promised safety layer after that safety layer has been an important factor in families' decisions to send their children back.

And to make that decision just when the cohort quarantining map was *turning red* with a dozen schools a week sending out notifications of a positive person having sat in a room for hours with a dozen other people? Unconscionable. Irresponsible.

[Anonymous]

So no testing?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:So no testing?

Random 10% each week of all those who opted into testing.
So it gives us some sort of idea of the level of virus circulating. It doesn't help interrupt in-school outbreaks.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:There is a chance in 10 that we'll find out about a school outbreak, now.
I don't understand how they could play bait and switch to this extent in the middle of a term. I am so disgusted. The promise of testing each opted-in student every 10 days was a factor in the decision of many families whether to send their kids into school. What can they do now? Nothing at all. It's unethical to take away a promised safety layer after that safety layer has been an important factor in families' decisions to send their children back.

And to make that decision just when the cohort quarantining map was *turning red* with a dozen schools a week sending out notifications of a positive person having sat in a room for hours with a dozen other people? Unconscionable. Irresponsible.

Asymptomatic testing only accurately detects COVID 40% of the time across the general population. That number is lower for young children. If you actually think that that asymptomatic testing every 10 days help, you are gravely misled. If anything, it actually hurts because it can provide false reassurance.

[Anonymous]

The classes are staying isolated from each other. My concern with the randomized selection is that they will miss entire classes.

[Anonymous]

NYC has been doing this type of limited surveillance testing fir many months.

I think with vaccinated teachers this will be fine.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There is a chance in 10 that we'll find out about a school outbreak, now.
I don't understand how they could play bait and switch to this extent in the middle of a term. I am so disgusted. The promise of testing each opted-in student every 10 days was a factor in the decision of many families whether to send their kids into school. What can they do now? Nothing at all. It's unethical to take away a promised safety layer after that safety layer has been an important factor in families' decisions to send their children back.

And to make that decision just when the cohort quarantining map was *turning red* with a dozen schools a week sending out notifications of a positive person having sat in a room for hours with a dozen other people? Unconscionable. Irresponsible.

Asymptomatic testing only accurately detects COVID 40% of the time across the general population. That number is lower for young children. If you actually think that that asymptomatic testing every 10 days help, you are gravely misled. If anything, it actually hurts because it can provide false reassurance.

40% of what?

They sent out FIFTEEN case notification letters last week. That's a dozen cohorts quarantined. If we assume your 40% number is correct, do you think that is a good reason to test vastly less than we had committed to? There's a lot of great misleading going around, but I'm not sure I get your argument.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:There is a chance in 10 that we'll find out about a school outbreak, now.
I don't understand how they could play bait and switch to this extent in the middle of a term. I am so disgusted. The promise of testing each opted-in student every 10 days was a factor in the decision of many families whether to send their kids into school. What can they do now? Nothing at all. It's unethical to take away a promised safety layer after that safety layer has been an important factor in families' decisions to send their children back.

And to make that decision just when the cohort quarantining map was *turning red* with a dozen schools a week sending out notifications of a positive person having sat in a room for hours with a dozen other people? Unconscionable. Irresponsible.

feel free to pull your kid out. the space will be easily filled.