I think that if they wait for a number of cases, the threat of exponential spread becomes too high. It seems like some of the schools were anticipating a stray case here and there, where they had a quarantine and contact tracing plan in place. Then they would quarantine those affected for 14 days. But in some schools, there were so many people affected that none of the classes could continue. In those places, the whole school shut down for 14 days to quarantine. After 14 days, I think they’re going to try a reboot to see if that lowers the infection rate. Some schools in recent articles I’ve read have opted to go to online learning only instead of trying the restart method.
Some parents are regretting sending their children back to school. Within a couple weeks, many have been exposed and now live with fears that they will get the virus.
A school district in San Jose is requiring teachers to show up in the classroom to teach online courses. Many of the teachers are unhappy about it. The district has only granted some exemptions. Others are required to teach in the classroom. Their rationale is that the equipment is easier to maintain in the classrooms. Just my opinion, but maintaining equipment seems like an unsatisfying response to putting one’s life on the line.
Before schools open, it makes sense to reassure parents that the number of cases will rise and this can be dealt with by initial and regular testing, availability of PPE (especially for teachers) masks and hand wash, and an advance plan for what levels of rise are unacceptable and require sensible additional measures rather than just open and close.
It doesn’t make sense to open without a good plan, some testing and some precautions. At this stage, many parents will not be reassured regardless of whether the actual risk is very low or pretty high. And who can blame them?
Still, over 20 countries have done it. Lessons can be learned from them. One is that there is always a gamble. Remember that “social distancing” means something different in Canada (2m or 6 ft) than in Europe (usually 1m or 3 ft). This has huge implications for class size.
I just sent this out this afternoon, first to the school board and superintendent. Heart in my throat. I hate this kind of thing.
Also sent it to the media, and mayor, and City Council, and put out as a public statement on social media. On the bright side, I am getting overwhelming support from school staff, which makes it a little less scary.
Today, the district introduced a liability waiver for any staff bringing their child to school. We are required to work on site, even while we are teaching 100% remotely. The only allowance we have for childcare is that we can have our children in our room with us all day long. No outside time, no partnering with another staff member to pod up. Refrigerators and microwaves are off-limits.
Now we are asked to sign a waiver stating that we have entered this arrangement voluntarily, and that we voluntarily accept the heightened risk to our family’s health of bringing our children on campus.
I have contacted our union attorneys and have advised people to hold off on signing if they possibly can. For some staff, it is too late: they were met at the door of their schools, when they walked in, with the waiver, and required to sign it on the spot.
This simply isn’t true. No countries have done what the US is trying to do: open schools and businesses while the coronavirus is rampaging unchecked throughout the country.
It’s simple:
It doesn’t work. It won’t work. The key to getting back to normal isn’t to try and act like everything is normal. That’s madness. The situation in the US is madness.
AFAIK twenty other countries have opened schools and have data. I agree their situation differs from the mess in Florida and several other (but not all) states. There are certainly States where things currently seem out of control and it is hard to recommend opening schools in States where, say, ICU beds are unavailable because there is no surge capacity for when things worsen. Opening schools will make things a little worse, in a good scenario.
Trying to ignore the fact that no other country has tried to re-open with the pandemic rampaging unchecked throughout the country doesn’t change that fact.
It’s not rampaging unchecked throughout the country. Almost half the states are under 100 new cases/million. States in that category can certainly look to varied us other countries that have opened.
I’m not quite sure where you see disagreement. I don’t think schools should open in States where things are and will likely remain out of control.
But this doesn’t apply to my primary interest of Canada, or even to many other States. School openings need to be done in a planned way and there is no point in opening them and closing them a week later because things were too unclear.
Covid Act now includes other parameters like contact tracing, hospital occupancy and Ro (or Rt) score how well a state (and even county) is doing. I would say maybe 16 states look okay.
My reply was to my esteemed friend from Las Vegas, Snowboarder Bo. I am grateful he started an important and comprehensive thread on coronavirus many months ago. I’m not sure anyone here disagrees that much. Some places are currently worse off than others.
Some experts think 10-75% of people will get coronavirus eventually. The original goal was to delay things to prevent overwhelming the systems. Our understanding has changed over the last few months. But a case is not a case - ICU, hospitalization, deaths and nursing home cases are not the same as a case with few symptoms, without minimizing the fact anyone can get very ill if particularly susceptible.
First allow me to yet again throw the Harvard Global Health Institute’s suggested metrics into the discussion. They are pretty much the best we’ve got for what should be judged as “looking okay”. And when you look please note that their guidance is not a binary “okay” or not “okay” but ranked with the prime metric being 7 day rolling average of daily new cases from green to yellow to orange to red. Red is >25/100K. All levels under that minimally prioritize “Grades preK-5 and in-person special education services at grade levels preK-8 open if conditions for pandemic resilient teaching and learning spaces can be achieved at scale …” Yellow (1<10/100K) would allow High Schools on a hybrid schedule … as a lower priority than preK to 8 and special needs populations.
Note per Covid Act Now 20 states are overall in yellow or better with only Vermont as green. 11 states are red (and they’d advise those states to be at stay at home orders level, not just in-person schools closed). 19 are orange.
But also importantly, the decisions should NOT be made at the states level but at the districts level. Some yellow states may have counties that are orange or even red, and an orange state may have much of their districts as yellow.
By their metrics there are many districts that should be on complete lock down (with schools all remote as part of that), more that should be doing their best to prioritize getting the elementary school students into school, and a sizable number that might be able to pull off High School as a hybrid system.
So how bad does it have to get before schools shut down again? Or is it just a matter of time? 35 students to a classroom (where I teach) just does not seem sustainable.
That’s not a comment on the model. The model can probably work if the rates of infection were more stable, but with the infection rates changing so rapidly, making plans, even mere weeks in advance, is proving difficult in many places.
It seems to me that the benefits of in-classroom instruction are greatly outweighed by the costs of abruptly shutting down a school over and over and over again throughout the semester. It’s a headache to parents. It’s disruptive to kids to never have time to get used to a routine. And I gotta think it’s stressful for school officials too because rather than paying attention to normal school business, they’ve got to focus on COVID all the time.
I will have to disagree here, there are many reports of states that are controlling the thing having to deal with people coming from other states close by using quarantines. Trying to tell districts to ignore what is happening at the state or even county level is reckless, when even between states there are problems, it is even more dangerous to act as if students, teachers and staff move less between districts. It is also reckless too to allow more layers of uncertainty by tacitly telling others that a concerted effort at all levels is not something that needs to be demanded to all leaders
What has been seen is that many times what the districts reasonably decide when the rate of infection is high is at odds with what higher levels of government are demanding they should do.
