Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Lots of cases at DS’s school, but no switch to virtual. Seems reckless!

Shut up, go away.

Came here to post exactly this

Anonymous wrote:Heads are in the sand for this wave. Unfortunately the virus doesn't go away when we ignore it.

We are keeping our kid home until things get better.

We thought about this but instead went with full body PPE and self-contained breathing apparatus. Still allows them to be in person but obviously limits the band and sports time.

Anonymous wrote:Lots of cases at DS’s school, but no switch to virtual. Seems reckless!

I know, schools and places need to lock down already! What are they thinking?!?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:DC is back in the 'low' range for community spread.

Community risk or community transmission? Those are two different things, now unclear with the new CDC color coding system. In some areas we are actually at high/substantial transmission rates but “risk” is low because of low hospitalization numbers. It’s important to understand the distinction as they are different data points.

Good point, but you are wasting your breath. People who don't already know this don't care to know.

It's great that there's room in the hospital for anyone who gets infected, but that doesn't help to manage or address large-scale absences from schools.

Lots of cases in some grades of our school so they are reverting certain classes back to masking depending on numbers in those grades. There are a lot of asymptomatic cases contributing to spread. My family just had it. We were all negative on home tests and asymptomatic but got positive PCR results!

Anonymous wrote:DC is back in the 'low' range for community spread.

Community risk or community transmission? Those are two different things, now unclear with the new CDC color coding system. In some areas we are actually at high/substantial transmission rates but “risk” is low because of low hospitalization numbers. It’s important to understand the distinction as they are different data points.

Anonymous wrote:Lots of cases at DS’s school, but no switch to virtual. Seems reckless!

Shut up, go away.

Anonymous wrote:How about directing all the energy and focus onto making schools better at teaching and doing more for the teachers.

The sad mask forever folks are the last ones to donate time, money or energy into improving schools. But mention Covid and off they go with passion.

Not mask forever. Live with COVID by masking as a community when cases are rising. Having large any given class out with COVID this late in the school year is NOT going to help teachers or make the school better. It's going to hurt everyone.

How about directing all the energy and focus onto making schools better at teaching and doing more for the teachers.

The sad mask forever folks are the last ones to donate time, money or energy into improving schools. But mention Covid and off they go with passion.

DC is back in the 'low' range for community spread.

Not only moving to virtual but asynchronous? Watch enrollment plummet in 3…2…1

Anonymous wrote:School changed to masking.

There are enough + cases across the school that leadership sent email explaining strategy for asynchronous learning.

My kids are at a small school where COVID is exploding, just in time for AP exams. I'm so annoyed, honestly, that leadership was not more proactive two weeks ago before there was such a large outbreak.

I doubt they will go virtual, but it's not a good learning environment when half the kids in any given class are out sick and staff is out as well.

School changed to masking.

There are enough + cases across the school that leadership sent email explaining strategy for asynchronous learning.

My kid’s class went virtual for a week recently due to a high number of cases that were isolated to that particular class.

Anonymous wrote:Schools will never go remote en masse again, even if they should.

And they never should have.