Anonymous wrote: I would prefer full time distance learning instead of this nonsense. This is all of the risk of sending children back to school with none of the benefits of having children in school.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:I get no one likes these plans, but what is your solution? They are trying to get kids back in school the best way they can. They can’t just open up schools with 500 kids and act like nothing happened. I don’t know what the right answer is but most people here won’t be happy with any solution
It's really not that hard to come up with ideas. If you're trying to minimize the number of kids present in school, we should be investing heavily in some full year virtual education options--like guided home schooling. In the other thread, I suggested reallocating principals and teachers with health concerns to a new 'virtual school'. Maybe stand up and Elementary, Middle, and High. If 10-20% of families opt into this, it opens up more possibilities for bringing kids back closer to full time at in-person schools.
Additionally, I'd like to see the city planning in lockdown periods to coincide for both school and elsewhere. We know the virus is likely to come back strong in the fall. Why not plan for a citywide cycle of something like 6 weeks on and 3 weeks off to contain the spread before it gets out of control. Right now, we're assuming there will be some unspecified trigger condition. But that's still going to come up on us more quickly than we would like. If we're proactive and go ahead and have occasional strict social distancing periods, we can keep everything from getting bad and hopefully better deal with the lockdown periods.
I like this. The problem is it can't just be the schools - everything woudl have to shut down for 3 weeks. What gets me is that it is JUST our children that are paying the price. THEY will be DL or in a school 2 days a week but the bars and coffee shops and resturants and spas and dog groomers and acupuncturists and churches will be oopen 7 days a week.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:I get no one likes these plans, but what is your solution? They are trying to get kids back in school the best way they can. They can’t just open up schools with 500 kids and act like nothing happened. I don’t know what the right answer is but most people here won’t be happy with any solution
It's really not that hard to come up with ideas. If you're trying to minimize the number of kids present in school, we should be investing heavily in some full year virtual education options--like guided home schooling. In the other thread, I suggested reallocating principals and teachers with health concerns to a new 'virtual school'. Maybe stand up and Elementary, Middle, and High. If 10-20% of families opt into this, it opens up more possibilities for bringing kids back closer to full time at in-person schools.
Additionally, I'd like to see the city planning in lockdown periods to coincide for both school and elsewhere. We know the virus is likely to come back strong in the fall. Why not plan for a citywide cycle of something like 6 weeks on and 3 weeks off to contain the spread before it gets out of control. Right now, we're assuming there will be some unspecified trigger condition. But that's still going to come up on us more quickly than we would like. If we're proactive and go ahead and have occasional strict social distancing periods, we can keep everything from getting bad and hopefully better deal with the lockdown periods.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Another example of school is not childcare so you can work.
School actually is childcare so parents can work.
No school started to prevent them from participating in the workforce.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Another example of school is not childcare so you can work.
School actually is childcare so parents can work.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:I get no one likes these plans, but what is your solution? They are trying to get kids back in school the best way they can. They can’t just open up schools with 500 kids and act like nothing happened. I don’t know what the right answer is but most people here won’t be happy with any solution
I think the problem with 2 days a week or whatever is they seem out of touch with what really goes on in schools- some parents will just send their kid every day so they can go to work or just not have to watch the child. What will schools do when parents won't pick the child up? Or some kids just won't go to school at all and not opt into virtual learning. There will be a lot of kids who fall through the cracks with these hybrid plans because it's so hard to keep track of who should be where when.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:I get no one likes these plans, but what is your solution? They are trying to get kids back in school the best way they can. They can’t just open up schools with 500 kids and act like nothing happened. I don’t know what the right answer is but most people here won’t be happy with any solution
It's really not that hard to come up with ideas. If you're trying to minimize the number of kids present in school, we should be investing heavily in some full year virtual education options--like guided home schooling. In the other thread, I suggested reallocating principals and teachers with health concerns to a new 'virtual school'. Maybe stand up and Elementary, Middle, and High. If 10-20% of families opt into this, it opens up more possibilities for bringing kids back closer to full time at in-person schools.
Additionally, I'd like to see the city planning in lockdown periods to coincide for both school and elsewhere. We know the virus is likely to come back strong in the fall. Why not plan for a citywide cycle of something like 6 weeks on and 3 weeks off to contain the spread before it gets out of control. Right now, we're assuming there will be some unspecified trigger condition. But that's still going to come up on us more quickly than we would like. If we're proactive and go ahead and have occasional strict social distancing periods, we can keep everything from getting bad and hopefully better deal with the lockdown periods.
Anonymous wrote:I get no one likes these plans, but what is your solution? They are trying to get kids back in school the best way they can. They can’t just open up schools with 500 kids and act like nothing happened. I don’t know what the right answer is but most people here won’t be happy with any solution
Anonymous wrote:I get no one likes these plans, but what is your solution? They are trying to get kids back in school the best way they can. They can’t just open up schools with 500 kids and act like nothing happened. I don’t know what the right answer is but most people here won’t be happy with any solution
Anonymous wrote:I get no one likes these plans, but what is your solution? They are trying to get kids back in school the best way they can. They can’t just open up schools with 500 kids and act like nothing happened. I don’t know what the right answer is but most people here won’t be happy with any solution
Anonymous wrote:What an unbelievably stupid idea