Reply to All schools should offer an all-virtual option

Forum Index » DC Public and Public Charter Schools

Reply to "All schools should offer an all-virtual option "

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]Right.   We need to be able to do both at once.  If schools aren’t able to pivot to virtual, either for entire classrooms or individual students who need to quarantine (because they are positive, they live with someone who is positive, etc), our choice is allowing these kids to continue to being covid to their classmates or for them to experience guaranteed learning loss.  Especially with all we invested in DL last year, we shouldn’t be facing this choice.

It very much seems that there would be plenty of “demand” for virtual classrooms next year, both from parents uncomfortable sending their unvaxed kids during delta, and kids who should be isolating.  [/quote]

The answer is NOT to demand virtual, but to demand mandatory vaccination of staff/teachers, and to use rational quarantine policies that exclude the fewest kids possible- for example by rapid testing every day instead of sending them home. [/quote]

The flaw with this plan is that testing is an opt-in and as detailed in the travel threads, lots of parents will refuse to opt in so they can travel without having to quarantine etc. There’s no way to make medical testing for kids mandatory, and I’ve harped on this before, there’s the religious exemption loophole so even when vaccines are available for all age groups, there will be parents who opt out.[/quote]

That’s parents not wanting to opt in to surveillance testing, bc they want their kid in school (and surveillance testing comes with a ton of issues, the basic one being high degree of false positives).  This is different, as the daily testing after exposure is targeted and woul allow kids to be in person.  I guess opting out of that would mean you have to stay home.[/quote]

You got that backwards. There are false negatives. Not false positives. [/quote]

No, in a symptomatic surveillance testing even with a high degree of test accuracy you get a high percentage of false positives when rates are low.[/quote] Where are rates low?[/quote]

In schools, as the article offered supports (did you read it?).  Even in delta-countries, rates in schools were low.  Hell, even in DC the rates are lower *at a community level* than what's discussed in the article.  That level in the article is 15/10,000 per week, which translates to 150/100,000 per week (to put it in terms that are comparable to what we have for DC stats).  We are at 70/100,000 (PER WEEK; I took the most recent estimate of 10/day and multiplied by 7).  So our community level is half what's discussed in the article, and likely our school level would be lower, as rates in schools have often found to be lower than community rates (they are at or lower than community rates).[/quote]

Thanks for posting these facts to cut through the noise of delta hysteria.[/quote]
"cut through delta hysteria" is a hilarious statement when every single public official is sounding the alarm, every single national daily data dump is trending steeply up, and new covid measures are announced everywhere.
Keep telling parents on DCUM they're being hysterical. Or maybe they're paying attention to the actual environment rather than just militantly advocate for pretending this is no big deal. [/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