Reply to What am I missing about the difficulty of distance learning?

Forum Index » Montgomery County Public Schools (MCPS)

Reply to "What am I missing about the difficulty of distance learning?"

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]OP DL can work ok for HS and middle school, but it doesn't work for ES at all. The younger the kid, the more quickly they tune out, need redirection and engagement, socialization and physical help. What you are describing sounds ok for 16 year olds - and even then it will still not work well. [/quote]

Similarly, younger kids can't be expected to safely social distance at school either. So the lesser of the two evils is the one that doesn't risk their lives.[/quote]

NP, and great news! [b] Younger kids aren't as susceptible to COVID, nor do they transmit it as easily between each other and to adults.[/b]

The other factor, of course, is that younger kids need a ton of assistance from adults; when that's DL, it becomes their parent(s), who may or may not be home or able to supervise them.  Not every household has a capable adult with nothing else to do but facilitate DL all day long.[/quote]

Please stop parrotting this nonsense.  It's dangerous and has not been proven true - in fact, the evidence has been conflicting.  Have you not heard these cases of rampant covid spread in daycare centers?[/quote]

Rampant COVID spread in daycare centers?  Now you're the one parroting nonsense.  Yes, I've seen reports of some outbreaks *in states where cases are increasing daily*.  I've also seen this data, which, while not perfect, is better than nonsense: https://explaincovid.org/kids/covid-19-and-children-our-crowd-sourced-data[/quote]

Yes, there's a couple dozen articles a day about outbreaks at summer camps and daycares. [b]The notion that kids are less susceptible is a right-wing talking point that isn't widely accepted or supported by the evidence.[/b][/quote]

No, the is scientific data to suggest that kids are in fact less likely to contract and spread the virus than adults, with teens looking a bit more like adults in terms of the likelihood of getting and spreading COVID.  Most of the articles I've seen suggest that a mix of staff and teens are getting it at camps, usually overnight camps.  In several articles, there was partying, counselors moving between bunks, etc., which likely led to its spread.[/quote]

PP again.  Kids are only 2% of US cases of COVID-19.  For example:

"A study published on June 16 in the Nature Medicine journal estimated that people under the age of 20 were approximately half as susceptible to the coronavirus compared to those older than 20."

Also:

"Redfield also noted that, unlike influenza, "we really don't have evidence that children are driving the transmission cycle" of the coronavirus."

https://www.cnn.com/2020/07/10/politics/do-kids-spread-coronavirus-fact-check/index.html

So we don't know for sure, there is at least some data to suggest that this COVID is not very likely to spread through kids (teens may be another story, and many news articles don't differentiate between younger kids and teens).[/quote]

I'll have to find the links but Redfield was criticized by health experts for saying that.  A couple of issues - not enough data is out there, which is a big reason why it's been inconclusive.  There is a lack of testing of kids <10.  And of course, there's this...

https://ktla.com/news/nationworld/cdc-documents-warned-full-reopening-of-schools-colleges-would-be-highest-risk-for-spreading-coronavirus-nyt/[/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