Reply to Covid at SFS

Forum Index » Private & Independent Schools

Reply to "Covid at SFS"

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]I’d love to hear more about the tent science? Because closed tents are like buildings but without ventilation [/quote]

Tents don't need to be closed. Look at the picture that was shared. Go check out Landon's campus, or St Albans. Small colleges all over the country also have been using them.[/quote]

Again, in December?! We live in the here and now[/quote]

You are just moving the goalposts. There have been non-stop defenders of the school (presumably you are among them) who have shouted up and down that the school has been doing a great job. Emphasis on has been. Now, you want to move on because that's in the past. If you would admit that the school has handled this terribly for the past three months, then perhaps we could establish a consensus upon which we could discuss where things should go from here.[/quote]

[b]I don’t think it has. It focused on high quality DL like it said it would, and further accommodated the parents who wanted HL. We are quite pleased.[/b] If anything, we wish there were a care center on campus for whomever needs or wants to be in person to join the DL because I’m sure there are those that need it. I might think differently if Bowser put in place community policies that were then in fact enforced, thus flattening the curve, thus enabling the schools to open. Honestly, people do hold a very different set of views. Look at what the response was to the most recent attempt to pressure. At least the derogatory name-calling of teachers and students on these boards has stopped (that honestly shook me to the core and made me far less sympathetic to the pro-open group)[/quote]

OK, then it's going to be difficult for us to have a conversation. [b]I truly don't believe that Bryan, Min and the rest have ever prioritized a return to campus[/b]. You seem to agree with my assessment based on the language bolded above. But my sense is that you are fine with this, because you appear to believe that it [b]should not be[/b] a priority. If we disagree on the priorities, then I don't see how we can discuss what solutions should happen in the here and now.

Please just answer this one question for me: why not tents for the past three months? Would you agree that that was a mistake?[/quote]

I haven't been part of this argument - but I agree with the above in bold.  Min explicitly said they didn't expect kids to come back on a public call and Bryan announced it in the letter communicating the schools plans - it said that US wasn't coming back until Jan.  The NAIS investigation/determination that private schools were not required to follow the city's "recommendation for separate, non-mixing cohorts" came out BEFORE Bryan's decision letter, so giving that NAIS information as one of the main reason to explain a change from the "DL til Jan" plan to "hybrid in Nov" was disingenuous at best.  Sidwell had clearly made a choice to stay 100% DL for US and planned that way.  When they got pushback from the community, they did a U-turn but they weren't fully prepared to move forward with the new plan (as was clear when teachers were blind-sided).

I'm not saying which side I prefer DL or Hybrid - but I definitely think they decided to invest mostly in DL for US (while doing some physical changes on campus) and did not invest much time on the logistics involved on how to transition back and forth between Hybrid and DL for US.  The scramble as a result of the U-turn exposed that and I felt it was a "bad look" for the administration.

[/quote]

Options

	Disable HTML in this message
	Disable BB Code in this message
	Disable smilies in this message

Review message

Search Recent Topics Hottest Topics