Kids are at low risk of getting infected by other kids, because the viral load is low. Maybe they got infected at spring break, though they likely would have been outdoors.
The same thing could have happened if they stayed in town.
By the time a positive test happens, the peak contagiousness period has passed, though they are still contagious and that's why they have a 10 day quarantine.
Why quarantine everyone over a small risk of infection and spread?
Again, the schools are OK with COVID positive students in school, so long as they quarantined 10 days after showing symptoms or testing positive. They do not quarantine the students who were in class with students who tested positive. They do not require tests from students who were in class with students who tested positive.
Why quarantine students who have not tested positive, just because they might have been in contact with someone who tested positive, might have gotten infected, and might be contagious enough to spread to others, when they are OK with students who DID come in contact with people who were positive, and students who DID become infected, and students who ARE CURRENTLY INFECTED?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Should all schools be DL for two weeks after Spring Break?
There will be an increase of COVID cases after Spring Break, and I don't think it will be safe for us to be back at school. So should School be DL after Spring Break for at least 2 weeks?

Several area privates have been doing DL for a week after major holidays and then test at the w d of that week before returning the following week. Some stay out for two weeks. Some just test. Doing nothing seems insane.

They have also been attending in-person since August/September, 5 days/week, etc... Let’s compare apples to apples, eh?

Having done DL for almost 365 days is insane.

No, actually many have been hybrid since August. But regardless, how does that suggest there’s nothing to learn from their practices? Seems like they would be a potential model. But you do you with the bad logic and all.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We have already missed SO much school. My family is not traveling for spring break. My kids should not have to miss another two weeks of school.

It should be that kids who travel or attend a gathering with people outside their household have to DL for two weeks. Anyone who doesn't travel or attend a gathering with people outside their household should get to go back to school.

Lol!

Anonymous wrote:We have already missed SO much school. My family is not traveling for spring break. My kids should not have to miss another two weeks of school.

It should be that kids who travel or attend a gathering with people outside their household have to DL for two weeks. Anyone who doesn't travel or attend a gathering with people outside their household should get to go back to school.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:High school teacher here and HARD NO!!!! I've made more progress with the few hybrid kids in only a few days than the entire year!!! No way no how. We need to keep the momentum going. I'm really hoping they allow for 4 days and fit as many kids in as allowable. I'm vaccinated, my colleagues are vaccinated. If you're worried nobody will bat an eye if you opt out for 2 weeks.

I’m a high school teacher. I’m fine with 4 day IF they let the DL families reselect. I do not think it’s fair to exclude them from that opportunity based on a decision they made in November when the premise was 2 days and circumstances around the virus were drastically different. If they can’t do 4 day opening it up to DL, then they need to stay hybrid but let DL families choose to opt into that. More kids in the building overall is going to have bigger impact than fewer kids for more days. So many kids are reachable if we can get them in with us. Keeping them at home while allowing the small number who picked hybrid to come more often doesn’t do as much for overall impact .

Basically, I have a very big issue with DL families not having the option to choose in person now. I have let the school board know I think whether it’s 2 day or 4 day, they are owed the opportunity to change their choice for last quarter.

A reselect is not happening. I know this as an absolute fact. I also know as a fact that secondary principals are already as of now given the green light to allow 4 days at their discretion and also at the discretion allow a switch from DL to HL. But a county wide respect won't be happening. We need to capture ad many kids in thr building ad possible at this point. The start contrast between my HL kids and DL kids is profound.

Frankly at the secondary level I think we should allow only 3 feet and allow everyone who wants is 4 days and just cut off bus service when capacity is reached. Too bad, drive your kids to school.

Annnnnnd you were correct.

Teacher here and HELL NO!

So this is the problem, why should we accept Covid positive children being in school because you needed to go to the beach in March? Seems to me that the folks that feel like they need to travel should be the ones taking responsibility for spending a handful of days at home to make sure they didn’t pick anything up while traveling and not expecting everyone else to be the shock absorbers for their behavior.

People need to understand that covid positive students will be in school, and the administrators are OK with this. The protocol for a positive case is for the student to stay home for ten days, then return to school. They are not requiring a negative test. It is not clear if asymptomatic spread is really a thing. These people who maybe got sick at spring break can just follow the same protocols of staying home if they are sick, get tested, and stay home for ten days if they test positive.
Middlle school and grade school are low risk of getting infected and even lower risk of infecting others.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Yes. But only the folks that travel.

Nah. Many types of travel can be less risky than the types of in-person gatherings many locals are hosting or attending.

It’s not an either or kinda thing. Super selfish on both.

Well the pp I was replying too doesn’t agree. She thinks only the travel folks should quarantine. But in VA there is no quarantine requirement.

It’s not required. But it would be the decent thing to do.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Yes. But only the folks that travel.

Nah. Many types of travel can be less risky than the types of in-person gatherings many locals are hosting or attending.

It’s not an either or kinda thing. Super selfish on both.

Well the pp I was replying too doesn’t agree. She thinks only the travel folks should quarantine. But in VA there is no quarantine requirement.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Yes. But only the folks that travel.

Nah. Many types of travel can be less risky than the types of in-person gatherings many locals are hosting or attending.

It’s not an either or kinda thing. Super selfish on both.

Anonymous wrote:Yes. But only the folks that travel.

Nah. Many types of travel can be less risky than the types of in-person gatherings many locals are hosting or attending.

Yes. But only the folks that travel.

Keep your kids home if you travel but otherwise no keep the schools open. I love seeing all the pics of these kids heading into the classroom for the first time in a year and their huge smiles (before the mask goes on)