Anonymous wrote:NYC schools just announced hybrid learning for 2020-2021 school year.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I suspect schools will be open this fall as normal. Rightly or wrongly, the world is moving on. By August, I bet coronavirus will not get nearly the same attention is does now.

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/06/10/us/politics/coronavirus-washington-trump.html

This is because it is summer. People are outside a lot more which helps limit the spread. If we look at Fauci’s statements, and the history of the Spanish flu, once the weather gets cooler things will change. Being in a school, let alone a tiny classroom with almost 30 kids, is a recipe for disaster. We don’t all teach young children. My students are 17-18 years old, nothing says they can’t spread the virus like a typical adult.

Summer weather doesn’t last forever. We have to think about the full year, not just right now. Health always always always needs to come first!

But Covid doesn't kill like the Spanish flu. It kills mostly people over 65. For the vast majority of younger people, the risk is minuscule. That is a scientific fact. When you weigh the education of millions against the health concerns of a small minority, it is not obvious that health must come first. We need to make accommodations for those at risk while recognizing the essential importance of education for millions of kids.

Please stop spreading false facts. You do not have to be old, you can be 30 and die. If you are overweight (which many Americans are), have Diabetes, etc. you have a much higher risk. That is a scientific fact.

For people under 30, the risk is lower than from the regular flu. BY A LOT. For kids under 18, they have a higher risk of being hospitalized as a result of NOROVIRUS (i.e., the regular old stomach bug) than COVID. This is not dangerous for kids. To the extent we're locking down, it is for vulnerable populations, but let's not pretend we aren't making kids and young workers bear the brunt of the costs while AN ENTIRELY DIFFERENT POPULATION is the most at risk (and, in the case of retired folks, BY FAR THE LEAST AFFECTED economically).

Not true, especially not for babies under 1. 11% of babies under 1 will become critical if contracted. 7% of 1-4 year olds will be critical and 4% of 5+ children. Think about the huge number of kids in schools. That translates into a lot of hospitalized critical kids. Even if the death rate is super low, i don’t want what I consider a pretty significant chance of my two young kids and infant being hospitalized and in critical condition.

What study are you looking at for these figures? They seem high. But, additionally, the evidence is that the vast majority of the kids that get super ill from COVID had serious pre-existing conditions (conditions that would, in many cases, keep them out of regular classrooms): https://www.nytimes.com/2020/05/11/health/coronavirus-children-icu.html. Also, you are correct that I was ignoring the stats on kids under 2, since it's not directly relevant to the school discussion.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I suspect schools will be open this fall as normal. Rightly or wrongly, the world is moving on. By August, I bet coronavirus will not get nearly the same attention is does now.

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/06/10/us/politics/coronavirus-washington-trump.html

This is because it is summer. People are outside a lot more which helps limit the spread. If we look at Fauci’s statements, and the history of the Spanish flu, once the weather gets cooler things will change. Being in a school, let alone a tiny classroom with almost 30 kids, is a recipe for disaster. We don’t all teach young children. My students are 17-18 years old, nothing says they can’t spread the virus like a typical adult.

Summer weather doesn’t last forever. We have to think about the full year, not just right now. Health always always always needs to come first!

But Covid doesn't kill like the Spanish flu. It kills mostly people over 65. For the vast majority of younger people, the risk is minuscule. That is a scientific fact. When you weigh the education of millions against the health concerns of a small minority, it is not obvious that health must come first. We need to make accommodations for those at risk while recognizing the essential importance of education for millions of kids.

Please stop spreading false facts. You do not have to be old, you can be 30 and die. If you are overweight (which many Americans are), have Diabetes, etc. you have a much higher risk. That is a scientific fact.

For people under 30, the risk is lower than from the regular flu. BY A LOT. For kids under 18, they have a higher risk of being hospitalized as a result of NOROVIRUS (i.e., the regular old stomach bug) than COVID. This is not dangerous for kids. To the extent we're locking down, it is for vulnerable populations, but let's not pretend we aren't making kids and young workers bear the brunt of the costs while AN ENTIRELY DIFFERENT POPULATION is the most at risk (and, in the case of retired folks, BY FAR THE LEAST AFFECTED economically).

Not true, especially not for babies under 1. 11% of babies under 1 will become critical if contracted. 7% of 1-4 year olds will be critical and 4% of 5+ children. Think about the huge number of kids in schools. That translates into a lot of hospitalized critical kids. Even if the death rate is super low, i don’t want what I consider a pretty significant chance of my two young kids and infant being hospitalized and in critical condition.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My biggest problem is most of the people posting here never cared about lower ses kids and their achievement. You only care now because you want to use them to justify sending kids back to school. It’s telling and it continues the narrative of only using people when it’s convenient for you.

It's also hilarious how people pretend that kids missing absurd amounts of school makes no difference at all, as if there's no cost to any of this to anyone.

It’s not hilarious and there is plenty of cost to go around. But people see through the lower ses argument. Especially DCPS. You run from low ses schools. There is a huge amount of white flight. Then to use these children as your basis for your argument is really hard to read.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My biggest problem is most of the people posting here never cared about lower ses kids and their achievement. You only care now because you want to use them to justify sending kids back to school. It’s telling and it continues the narrative of only using people when it’s convenient for you.

It's also hilarious how people pretend that kids missing absurd amounts of school makes no difference at all, as if there's no cost to any of this to anyone.

It’s not hilarious and there is plenty of cost to go around. But people see through the lower ses argument. Especially DCPS. You run from low ses schools. There is a huge amount of white flight. Then to use these children as your basis for your argument is really hard to read.

It’s really gross. So are the people who think that if people can exercise their constitutional rights to protest modern day lynchings that school should open as usual, for their convenience.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My biggest problem is most of the people posting here never cared about lower ses kids and their achievement. You only care now because you want to use them to justify sending kids back to school. It’s telling and it continues the narrative of only using people when it’s convenient for you.

It's also hilarious how people pretend that kids missing absurd amounts of school makes no difference at all, as if there's no cost to any of this to anyone.

It’s not hilarious and there is plenty of cost to go around. But people see through the lower ses argument. Especially DCPS. You run from low ses schools. There is a huge amount of white flight. Then to use these children as your basis for your argument is really hard to read.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My biggest problem is most of the people posting here never cared about lower ses kids and their achievement. You only care now because you want to use them to justify sending kids back to school. It’s telling and it continues the narrative of only using people when it’s convenient for you.

It's also hilarious how people pretend that kids missing absurd amounts of school makes no difference at all, as if there's no cost to any of this to anyone.

Anonymous wrote:My biggest problem is most of the people posting here never cared about lower ses kids and their achievement. You only care now because you want to use them to justify sending kids back to school. It’s telling and it continues the narrative of only using people when it’s convenient for you.

Anonymous wrote:"The average student could begin the next school year having lost as much as a third of the expected progress from the previous year in reading and half of the expected progress in math...

the average student could fall seven months behind academically, while black and Hispanic students could experience even greater learning losses, equivalent to 10 months for black children and nine months for Latinos, according to an analysis from McKinsey & Company, the consulting group."


https://www.nytimes.com/2020/06/05/us/coronavirus-education-lost-learning.html

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I suspect schools will be open this fall as normal. Rightly or wrongly, the world is moving on. By August, I bet coronavirus will not get nearly the same attention is does now.

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/06/10/us/politics/coronavirus-washington-trump.html

This is because it is summer. People are outside a lot more which helps limit the spread. If we look at Fauci’s statements, and the history of the Spanish flu, once the weather gets cooler things will change. Being in a school, let alone a tiny classroom with almost 30 kids, is a recipe for disaster. We don’t all teach young children. My students are 17-18 years old, nothing says they can’t spread the virus like a typical adult.

Summer weather doesn’t last forever. We have to think about the full year, not just right now. Health always always always needs to come first!

But Covid doesn't kill like the Spanish flu. It kills mostly people over 65. For the vast majority of younger people, the risk is minuscule. That is a scientific fact. When you weigh the education of millions against the health concerns of a small minority, it is not obvious that health must come first. We need to make accommodations for those at risk while recognizing the essential importance of education for millions of kids.

Please stop spreading false facts. You do not have to be old, you can be 30 and die. If you are overweight (which many Americans are), have Diabetes, etc. you have a much higher risk. That is a scientific fact.

For people under 30, the risk is lower than from the regular flu. BY A LOT. For kids under 18, they have a higher risk of being hospitalized as a result of NOROVIRUS (i.e., the regular old stomach bug) than COVID. This is not dangerous for kids. To the extent we're locking down, it is for vulnerable populations, but let's not pretend we aren't making kids and young workers bear the brunt of the costs while AN ENTIRELY DIFFERENT POPULATION is the most at risk (and, in the case of retired folks, BY FAR THE LEAST AFFECTED economically).

Not true, especially not for babies under 1. 11% of babies under 1 will become critical if contracted. 7% of 1-4 year olds will be critical and 4% of 5+ children. Think about the huge number of kids in schools. That translates into a lot of hospitalized critical kids. Even if the death rate is super low, i don’t want what I consider a pretty significant chance of my two young kids and infant being hospitalized and in critical condition.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:"The average student could begin the next school year having lost as much as a third of the expected progress from the previous year in reading and half of the expected progress in math...

the average student could fall seven months behind academically, while black and Hispanic students could experience even greater learning losses, equivalent to 10 months for black children and nine months for Latinos, according to an analysis from McKinsey & Company, the consulting group."


https://www.nytimes.com/2020/06/05/us/coronavirus-education-lost-learning.html

Fall behind who? The imaginary children who stayed in school all year?

I love how blase everyone suddenly is about the importance of school.

But they are falling behind where they should be (maybe we should just flunk everyone). The effect is especially pronounced with poor kids. If a child's parents both went to Harvard, no, closing schools probably isn't going to matter so much to them. It's lower SES kids that everyone should be worrying about. From the article:

"A separate analysis of 800,000 students from researchers at Brown and Harvard looked at how Zearn, an online math program, was used both before and after schools closed in March. It found that through late April, student progress in math decreased by about half in classrooms located in low-income ZIP codes, by a third in classrooms in middle-income ZIP codes and not at all in classrooms in high-income ZIP codes."

Falling behind whom?!?!? The imaginary children who have been in schools this whole time? Wtf