Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Europe can afford to go back to virtual because so many of their kids have been in-person. That means there is less urgency to get back because the mental health and learning loss are much lower than here. We should have been back from the start so we could build in breaks during surges.

I'm pushing back on claims of learning loss.

What data do you have to show that virtual schooling results in learning loss? Has it ever been tried before in the US to this extent?

Anonymous wrote:Europe can afford to go back to virtual because so many of their kids have been in-person. That means there is less urgency to get back because the mental health and learning loss are much lower than here. We should have been back from the start so we could build in breaks during surges.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Europe can afford to go back to virtual because so many of their kids have been in-person. That means there is less urgency to get back because the mental health and learning loss are much lower than here. We should have been back from the start so we could build in breaks during surges.

I'm pushing back on claims of learning loss.

What data do you have to show that virtual schooling results in learning loss? Has it ever been tried before in the US to this extent?

And followup question: what data do you have to show that learning loss with hybrid/concurrent teaching is less than with all virtual?

Have there been any studies done or are people just making assumptions?

Anonymous wrote:Oddly the ones that are closing are pointing to the US as an example.

Anonymous wrote:Oddly the ones that are closing are pointing to the US as an example.

Anonymous wrote:Meant open!

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Europe can afford to go back to virtual because so many of their kids have been in-person. That means there is less urgency to get back because the mental health and learning loss are much lower than here. We should have been back from the start so we could build in breaks during surges.

I'm pushing back on claims of learning loss.

What data do you have to show that virtual schooling results in learning loss? Has it ever been tried before in the US to this extent?

Anonymous wrote:Europe can afford to go back to virtual because so many of their kids have been in-person. That means there is less urgency to get back because the mental health and learning loss are much lower than here. We should have been back from the start so we could build in breaks during surges.

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention predicts the same variant will overtake other strains in the United States in March. But there was no mention of it in the CDC papers published this past week supporting the reopening of K-12 schools in the United States.

CDC researchers looked to Europe’s experience in the fall to inform their conclusion that “there has been little evidence that schools have contributed meaningfully to increased community transmission.”

As President Biden pushes to reopen U.S. schools, much of Europe is moving in the opposite direction.

From Britain to Portugal to Denmark to Austria, countries that previously prioritized keeping classrooms open at nearly any cost are saying the risks are too high. Some say it may be months before students can again see their teachers in person.

The changed calculus reflects the arrival of the more contagious coronavirus variant, first identified in Britain, that has created astonishing spikes in cases and put pressure on medical systems across the continent.