Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You all need to face reality. There will be NO full classes for the REST OF THIS YEAR. This is actually not a WTU decision, as you can tell they have no more leverage and have been trying to advocate for funding. Which is what YOU should be doing. Because we are UNDERFUNDED, don't be fooled with that fake stimulus money.

I am a teacher on my school's LSAT and we are being told to plan next year as a REGULAR FULL YEAR. However there are no guarantees it will be full capacity. Especially with budget cuts.

What’s a REGULAR FULL YEAR?

Does that mean 5 days a week full time in person? Also are you talking school year or calendar year?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:uh No.

DCPS has washed their hands of this. Their work is done and self congrats have gone out. The students are back. Haven't you heard?

This. I am not hopeful. They have delegated the matter to the principals who do as they see fit. Everybody can now say schools are open, never mind that the demand was not met. The pressure is off. It's disgraceful.

is that true? I have no general data only anecdotal evidence, but in our case my HS kid and a group of peer in her scout group were offered a spot in school and all turned it down. when we turned it down (at Wilson) the teacher mentioned that apparently the school was not getting a lot of positive responses (I was also surprised because none of the kids is at risk and at least two of them are excellent students). so got the impression that there was not really a stampede to go back to class, at least in HS (friends with early ES kids all happily accepted the spots offered in my experience)

Anonymous wrote:The kids really aren't going back at all this school year?? So ridiculous.

Anonymous wrote:You all need to face reality. There will be NO full classes for the REST OF THIS YEAR. This is actually not a WTU decision, as you can tell they have no more leverage and have been trying to advocate for funding. Which is what YOU should be doing. Because we are UNDERFUNDED, don't be fooled with that fake stimulus money.

I am a teacher on my school's LSAT and we are being told to plan next year as a REGULAR FULL YEAR. However there are no guarantees it will be full capacity. Especially with budget cuts.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:uh No.

DCPS has washed their hands of this. Their work is done and self congrats have gone out. The students are back. Haven't you heard?

This. I am not hopeful. They have delegated the matter to the principals who do as they see fit. Everybody can now say schools are open, never mind that the demand was not met. The pressure is off. It's disgraceful.

is that true? I have no general data only anecdotal evidence, but in our case my HS kid and a group of peer in her scout group were offered a spot in school and all turned it down. when we turned it down (at Wilson) the teacher mentioned that apparently the school was not getting a lot of positive responses (I was also surprised because none of the kids is at risk and at least two of them are excellent students). so got the impression that there was not really a stampede to go back to class, at least in HS (friends with early ES kids all happily accepted the spots offered in my experience)

Perhaps demand is met at the high school level. That’s a very different scenario from elementary where the younger students can’t read and it all falls on parents to log them in, ensure they pay attention, and then supplement to make sure the children actually learn something because virtually learning for a K student is a joke. And you know, not get fired from our own jobs at the same time.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:uh No.

DCPS has washed their hands of this. Their work is done and self congrats have gone out. The students are back. Haven't you heard?

This. I am not hopeful. They have delegated the matter to the principals who do as they see fit. Everybody can now say schools are open, never mind that the demand was not met. The pressure is off. It's disgraceful.

is that true? I have no general data only anecdotal evidence, but in our case my HS kid and a group of peer in her scout group were offered a spot in school and all turned it down. when we turned it down (at Wilson) the teacher mentioned that apparently the school was not getting a lot of positive responses (I was also surprised because none of the kids is at risk and at least two of them are excellent students). so got the impression that there was not really a stampede to go back to class, at least in HS (friends with early ES kids all happily accepted the spots offered in my experience)

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:uh No.

DCPS has washed their hands of this. Their work is done and self congrats have gone out. The students are back. Haven't you heard?

This. I am not hopeful. They have delegated the matter to the principals who do as they see fit. Everybody can now say schools are open, never mind that the demand was not met. The pressure is off. It's disgraceful.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Could someone explain how we are in the "moderate" range?

The CDC indicators are, for "Total new cases per 100,000 persons in the past 7 days"

Low - 0-9
Moderate - 10-49
Substantial - 50-99
High - 100+

When I look at the CDC's data tracker, we are at 768 cases total over the last 7 days, or 108.82 per 100k. That puts us in the "high" range, not the moderate range.

I think we are getting mixed up between DC's version of "moderate" spread (which is rolling average of 15/100,000 per day over 7 days) and the CDC's version of "substantial" or "orange" which is 50-99 cases total over 7 days per 100,000. If your numbers are correct, we are getting close to "substantial" but aren't there yet.

At "substantial" (orange) the only different CDC guidelines are that that MS and HS should be hybrid, and outdoor sports are sort of allowed.

I imagine that with rates plummeting as quickly as they are, that we will get to substantial within a week, and will get to moderate by summer (particularly with vaccine rollout).

The question is still whether OSSE will change it's guidelines according to CDC, or if they will just continue to do whatever.

Yes, the original OP made a common mistake. CDC school reopening guidelines use total cases over the last 7 days (per 100,000), which is a common metric in europe also. You need to divide those numbers by 7 if you want to compare to 7-day rolling averages. We have a ways to get to CDC moderate, which is at 7 cases per day per 100,000. Many are complaining that the CDC guidelines are too conservative...

I don't think we are that far from "yellow" and it would make sense for OSSE to start talking about changing their requirements to at least be in line with the (potentially conservative) CDC guidelines. It at least appears that we'd be at yellow by Fall, 2021.

I know a lot of people are very worried that OSSE will just keep its head in the sand, though, and we'll continue to have a small portion of kids in hybrid through 2022.

They don't need to START talking about making their requirements in line with CDC requirements. Schools have been closed for a year, they need to get their act together and open the damn schools. They have been TALKING about it all year.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Could someone explain how we are in the "moderate" range?

The CDC indicators are, for "Total new cases per 100,000 persons in the past 7 days"

Low - 0-9
Moderate - 10-49
Substantial - 50-99
High - 100+

When I look at the CDC's data tracker, we are at 768 cases total over the last 7 days, or 108.82 per 100k. That puts us in the "high" range, not the moderate range.

That's a good point but the dcist article quoted says dc is in the moderate range for the cdc. Possibly that is an error or perhaps that is because the test positivity rate puts dc in a very low category.

Is it? I'm not getting that math?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Could someone explain how we are in the "moderate" range?

The CDC indicators are, for "Total new cases per 100,000 persons in the past 7 days"

Low - 0-9
Moderate - 10-49
Substantial - 50-99
High - 100+

When I look at the CDC's data tracker, we are at 768 cases total over the last 7 days, or 108.82 per 100k. That puts us in the "high" range, not the moderate range.

That's a good point but the dcist article quoted says dc is in the moderate range for the cdc. Possibly that is an error or perhaps that is because the test positivity rate puts dc in a very low category.

Is it? I'm not getting that math?