Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Infectious disease expert after infectious disease expert have written pieces on why kids need to be back in school. The only so-called "scientists" arguing for kids to stay home are anonymous dcum posters.

Huh? Infectious disease experts are experts in infectious diseases, not in education or child psychology or even public health.

Precisely. Infectious disease experts are the experts on the dangers from Covid and they recognize that the dangers to children are relatively low. Obviously DL is subpar for the education and psychological well being of children. It is only proper when the dangers from the infectious disease have to outweigh education and psychological well being. If any group would argue in favor of keeping schools closed, it would be the infectious disease experts, not those primarily concerned about children's education or psychological health.

Here's the 6,453,897th post on this forum since June stating that children live in families and communities with people whose risks are higher.

Anonymous wrote:Want to see what a real plan looks like? Here is what Washington County, MD's BOE approved over a month ago:

http://wcpsmd.com/news/wcboe-approves-superintendents-plan-return-person-instruction

It defines clear phases, who goes back in those phases, and the metrics needed to enter that phase.

Indeed the first set of students (pre-K, special needs, ESL) went back 3 weeks ago.

Metrics remained good, so the next stage starts on Monday and K goes back along with some high schoolers in vocational programs:
http://wcpsmd.com/news/wcps-announces-stage-3-start-october-12

See what they've done? Clear metrics, clear communication of how they are doing.

None of this took a lot of money. Just leadership, communication, and planning. Their BOE approved an emergency budget item in July to buy PPE, sanitizers, etc for all schools.

All this despite being one of the lowest-funded school systems in MD (#20/25 in per-student funding).

Sure, they have fewer students than MCPS, but that means they also have fewer employees to implement their plans. Yet, somehow they pulled it off.

Their positivity rate is 2.5%, while MoCo is 2.6%. Their new cases/day per 100k has been sitting in the 7-9 range, just like MoCo.

Two counties in the same state, similar case rate, about an hour drive apart, yet one has had kids back in school for 3 weeks, the other hasn't even published a plan.

The only difference? Leadership.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Infectious disease expert after infectious disease expert have written pieces on why kids need to be back in school. The only so-called "scientists" arguing for kids to stay home are anonymous dcum posters.

Huh? Infectious disease experts are experts in infectious diseases, not in education or child psychology or even public health.

Precisely. Infectious disease experts are the experts on the dangers from Covid and they recognize that the dangers to children are relatively low. Obviously DL is subpar for the education and psychological well being of children. It is only proper when the dangers from the infectious disease have to outweigh education and psychological well being. If any group would argue in favor of keeping schools closed, it would be the infectious disease experts, not those primarily concerned about children's education or psychological health.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Infectious disease expert after infectious disease expert have written pieces on why kids need to be back in school. The only so-called "scientists" arguing for kids to stay home are anonymous dcum posters.

Huh? Infectious disease experts are experts in infectious diseases, not in education or child psychology or even public health.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

This is a rational answer. I agree that there are reasons to open and also valid reasons for staying closed. What is not acceptable is not having a plan for some sort of return, even if that isn't until the Spring. Even if it is wishful thinking that metrics will be good enough to open, it would be nice to have some plan.

There is a plan.

It needs to be an agreed upon, with all logistics, including transportation, PPE and other mitigation measures in place, ready to go. Without that, it's not a real plan that can be implemented.

They're working on it.

If they are working on a plan, there is no plan right now.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

This is a rational answer. I agree that there are reasons to open and also valid reasons for staying closed. What is not acceptable is not having a plan for some sort of return, even if that isn't until the Spring. Even if it is wishful thinking that metrics will be good enough to open, it would be nice to have some plan.

There is a plan.

It needs to be an agreed upon, with all logistics, including transportation, PPE and other mitigation measures in place, ready to go. Without that, it's not a real plan that can be implemented.

They're working on it.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

This is a rational answer. I agree that there are reasons to open and also valid reasons for staying closed. What is not acceptable is not having a plan for some sort of return, even if that isn't until the Spring. Even if it is wishful thinking that metrics will be good enough to open, it would be nice to have some plan.

There is a plan.

It needs to be an agreed upon, with all logistics, including transportation, PPE and other mitigation measures in place, ready to go. Without that, it's not a real plan that can be implemented.

Anonymous wrote:

Infectious disease expert after infectious disease expert have written pieces on why kids need to be back in school. The only so-called "scientists" arguing for kids to stay home are anonymous dcum posters.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

To play devils advocate, what is the incentive for MCPS to put out a reopening plan given that what you said is true- i.e., it could be years before the county meets those numbers? I 100% agree that Elrich/Gayles are putting a goal out there that does not make sense, but MCPS surely recognizes this as well and as such is in no hurry to come up with a plan.

Yeah. Ok. But I guess my bigger objection then is for someone (ANYONE) in a position of authority to show a little backbone here.

You're right; they have no incentive to talk about re-opening when they know they can't meet those numbers.

But Smith is supposed to be a leader in the community. It would be nice if he showed a little courage and stood up for the people that he is supposed to be servicing (i.e the students)

Given the blowback proponents of DL are getting from everyone from President Trump to Gov. Hogan to you, one could argue that it takes more courage for Elrich/Gayles/Smith to rule out in-person instruction right now than it would to start it back up in some fashion.

I agree. It's tough to fight Trump and his Russian allies.

I really feel like MCPS would approach things differently if we had a Democrat Governor and/or President -- even if we had the exact same virus rate.

But, because Republicans have been more in favor of opening things up, this has become wrapped up in partisan politics and allowing things to open would be viewed as giving in to the Republicans.

You are correct. We were well on our way towards a hybrid approach over the summer.

Then, Trump and DeVos had a press conference about how all schools should re-open. The teachers union and the board heard that press conference and had an immediate change of heart.

It's a purely emotional reaction to the president that kept our kids home. Nothing based in fact or science.

Honestly, I think if the President came out today and said "ya know what, keep your kids home. it's too dangerous", our board would react with "you can't tell us what to do! we're going to open"

And are you an actual scientist? your post does not indicate that at all. There are reasons to keep kids home right now. not saying it's easy.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

This is a rational answer. I agree that there are reasons to open and also valid reasons for staying closed. What is not acceptable is not having a plan for some sort of return, even if that isn't until the Spring. Even if it is wishful thinking that metrics will be good enough to open, it would be nice to have some plan.

There is a plan.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

This is a rational answer. I agree that there are reasons to open and also valid reasons for staying closed. What is not acceptable is not having a plan for some sort of return, even if that isn't until the Spring. Even if it is wishful thinking that metrics will be good enough to open, it would be nice to have some plan.

There is a plan.

Anonymous wrote:

This is a rational answer. I agree that there are reasons to open and also valid reasons for staying closed. What is not acceptable is not having a plan for some sort of return, even if that isn't until the Spring. Even if it is wishful thinking that metrics will be good enough to open, it would be nice to have some plan.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

To play devils advocate, what is the incentive for MCPS to put out a reopening plan given that what you said is true- i.e., it could be years before the county meets those numbers? I 100% agree that Elrich/Gayles are putting a goal out there that does not make sense, but MCPS surely recognizes this as well and as such is in no hurry to come up with a plan.

Yeah. Ok. But I guess my bigger objection then is for someone (ANYONE) in a position of authority to show a little backbone here.

You're right; they have no incentive to talk about re-opening when they know they can't meet those numbers.

But Smith is supposed to be a leader in the community. It would be nice if he showed a little courage and stood up for the people that he is supposed to be servicing (i.e the students)

Given the blowback proponents of DL are getting from everyone from President Trump to Gov. Hogan to you, one could argue that it takes more courage for Elrich/Gayles/Smith to rule out in-person instruction right now than it would to start it back up in some fashion.

I agree. It's tough to fight Trump and his Russian allies.

I really feel like MCPS would approach things differently if we had a Democrat Governor and/or President -- even if we had the exact same virus rate.

But, because Republicans have been more in favor of opening things up, this has become wrapped up in partisan politics and allowing things to open would be viewed as giving in to the Republicans.

You are correct. We were well on our way towards a hybrid approach over the summer.

Then, Trump and DeVos had a press conference about how all schools should re-open. The teachers union and the board heard that press conference and had an immediate change of heart.

It's a purely emotional reaction to the president that kept our kids home. Nothing based in fact or science.

Honestly, I think if the President came out today and said "ya know what, keep your kids home. it's too dangerous", our board would react with "you can't tell us what to do! we're going to open"

And are you an actual scientist? your post does not indicate that at all. There are reasons to keep kids home right now. not saying it's easy.

There are reasons to keep them closed. And there are good reasons to open them. There is no easy answer. While people associate Republicans with wanting to open things, there are many Democratic led states and municipalities that have opened up more than we have with comparable numbers. Because of this, I actually think Hogan being Governor plays a bigger role than Trump.

Hogan and Elrich clearly don't like each other and I think Hogan being Governor makes Elrich less willing to open that he would be otherwise.