School openings need….

July 22, 2020

Coronavirus

Israel

Cases   ( 55,695)
Deaths   ( 430)

Deaths per million   ( 47)

An uncontrolled medical experiment with children. Have your children sick for the Dow.

July 22, 2020

Coronavirus

US

Cases   ( 4,064,335)
Deaths   ( 145,420)

July 22, 2020

Coronavirus

Israel

Cases   ( 56,085)
Deaths   ( 430)

Deaths per million   ( 47)

Confirmed coronavirus cases in Israel increased by a remarkable 3.78% on July 22.

After decades of neglect, the schools should have and still need an infusion of cash equal to the amount of money showered on corporate America during this crisis before we consider reopening them. Consider it the long awaited infrastructure bill targeted towards something that everyone says they are in favor of but no one has ever gotten around to voting for.

http://nces.ed.gov/programs/digest/d11/tables/dt11_069.asp

January, 2020

Public elementary and secondary pupil/teacher ratios, 1980-2020

1980   ( 18.7)
1981   ( 18.8)   Reagan   (High)
1982   ( 18.6)
1983   ( 18.4)
1984   ( 18.1)

1985   ( 17.9)
1986   ( 17.7)
1987   ( 17.6)
1988   ( 17.3)
1989   ( 17.2)   Bush

1990   ( 17.2)
1991   ( 17.3)
1992   ( 17.4)
1993   ( 17.4)   Clinton
1994   ( 17.3)

1995   ( 17.3)
1996   ( 17.1)
1997   ( 16.8)
1998   ( 16.4)
1999   ( 16.1)

2000   ( 16.0)
2001   ( 15.9)   Bush
2002   ( 15.9)
2003   ( 15.9)
2004   ( 15.8)

2005   ( 15.6)
2006   ( 15.6)
2007   ( 15.5)
2008   ( 15.3)
2009   ( 15.4)   Obama

2010   ( 15.2)
2011   ( 15.2)
2012   ( 15.2)
2013   ( 15.1)
2014   ( 15.1)

2015   ( 15.0)   (Low)
2016   ( 15.0)
2017   ( 15.0)   Trump
2018   ( 15.0)
2019   ( 15.0)

2020   ( 15.0)

Correcting:

http://nces.ed.gov/programs/digest/d11/tables/dt11_069.asp

January, 2020

Public elementary and secondary pupil/teacher ratios, 1980-2020

2014 ( 15.1)

2015 ( 15.1)
2016 ( 15.0) (Low)
2017 ( 15.0) Trump
2018 ( 15.0)
2019 ( 15.0)

2020 ( 15.0)

Supposing that the public schools in a city have a ratio of students to teachers of roughly 15, then at a time when small class sizes are especially called for for safety sake there should be no reason for classes of 30. Possibly there should have been no reason before for classes with relatively large numbers of students, but now should be different.

We are in a time when there have been important structural changes through the economy.  I am impressed by the changes just in my neighborhood, though my neighborhood has so far been little affected directly by the epidemic.  The changes I notice strike me as likely lasting, so I am trying to anticipate what will last.

I think many analysts are underestimating the impact and persistence of structural changes in the economy, so I am playing with ideas.

Here, in the SF Bay Area, most classes have at least 30 students/class. It is not at all unusual for there to be 35 in middle school and high school classrooms; beyond 35, you have to start stacking – the rooms are sized….

[ Understood and important. However, the logistics of classes in the midst of the epidemic will have to be changed if teachers and students are to be protected. A sitting class of 30 or 35 students must be reconsidered. There would seem to be no choice.

Austria, I remember, opened schools by having half the students in class every other day. So 30 becomes 15. Half in class by video, half actually there and switching each day.

I am just playing while being unacquainted with primary and secondary school structures from the perspective of a teacher. ]

July 23, 2020

Coronavirus

Israel

Cases   ( 57,982)
Deaths   ( 442)

Deaths per million   ( 48)

———————————–

July 4, 2020

Coronavirus

Israel

Cases   ( 29,170)
Deaths   ( 330)

Deaths per million   ( 36)

Anne,

My daughter and I brainstormed this back in March, she teaches AP Sci.
It’s the classrooms, the hallways during passing periods, the cafeterias, the ventilation systems, behavior, prep periods, PPEs, … And, in the end, no one knows what the situation will be in the fall, the states are broke, and we have a sociopathic idiot for president.

It is simply just another catastrophe caused be a dysfunctional government.

Trump has decimated our government in almost every single area.

Look at the nonsense caused by the CDC bowing to him.

“Donald Trump has gotten his wish: The CDC just released a note suggesting that schools should reopen next year. But check out the waffling in the section about the dangers of COVID-19:

‘Scientific studies suggest that COVID-19 transmission among children in schools may be low. International studies that have assessed how readily COVID-19 spreads in schools also reveal low rates of transmission when community transmission is low. Based on current data, the rate of infection among younger school children, and from students to teachers, has been low, especially if proper precautions are followed.’

Even in a letter caving in to Trump’s school reopening demands, the CDC is only willing to say that it might be safe among younger children in areas where the virus is already under control. This is considerably less clear-cut than Trump might have hoped for, but you have to read carefully to see it. Put it all together and I’ll bet it applies to no more than about 5-10 percent of all schoolchildren in the country.”

The CDC Says We Can Reopen Schools, But There’s a Catch

This curious OpEd appeared in the Boston Globe
a few days ago, as an example of how they can
be ‘fair & balanced’ perhaps.

I’m not buying it.

Listen to the science and reopen schools

… listen to the science, which says that schools can — and should — reopen for in-person learning with appropriate risk reduction strategies, while officials also implement aggressive steps to keep community transmission low.

Listen to the American Academy of Pediatrics, which argued for focusing on science and not politics in supporting a return to in-person schooling with new investments in safety, describing in-person school as “fundamental” to the well-being of the nation’s children.

Prolonged time away from schools has led to months of lost learning and widened gaps in educational achievement, especially for some students of color and those in lower income households. Adding months more to this toll will be an educational disaster that some children may never recover from. School closures also threaten some children’s safety, due to increased child neglect, hurt children’s mental health, and keep many from getting enough to eat.

The harms of school closure are clear. What about the risks of reopening?

Multiple studies show that children are not only less likely to become seriously ill from COVID-19, they are also only half as likely to get infected in the first place. Overall, the rate of infection requiring hospitalization among US school-age children (5 to 17) since the beginning of the pandemic though July 4 was roughly 1 in 20,000.

What about the risk to teachers and staff? Again, listen to the science. A report led by the former head of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention under President Obama concluded that children appear less likely than adults to transmit COVID-19 to others — unlike other viruses like influenza — though this evidence is still limited and preliminary. Studies examining schools with known cases of COVID-19 have shown low transmission rates — for instance, in one case, just two students and no teachers infected out of 863 close contacts. Others show zero confirmed infections even among teachers and students who sat in the same classroom with a symptomatic child. …

American Academy of Pediatrics clarifies stance on reopening schools

New statement says science, local experts should help decide school reopenings

The American Academy of Pediatrics recently came out with an updated statement regarding the reopening of schools.

It reads in part:

“Returning to school is important for the healthy development and well-being of children, but we must pursue re-opening in a way that is safe for all students, teachers and staff. Science should drive decision-making on safely reopening schools. Public health agencies must make recommendations based on evidence, not politics. We should leave it to health experts to tell us when the time is best to open up school buildings, and listen to educators and administrators to shape how we do it.”

“Local school leaders, public health experts, educators and parents must be at the center of decisions about how and when to reopen schools, taking into account the spread of COVID-19 in their communities and the capacities of school districts to adapt safety protocols to make in-person learning safe and feasible. For instance, schools in areas with high levels of COVID-19 community spread should not be compelled to reopen against the judgment of local experts. A one-size-fits-all approach is not appropriate for return to school decisions.”

“The original guidance was always written as being a strong advocates for the goal of kids physically being present in school with a lot of things to consider and that’s where things got misrepresented and misunderstood,” said Dr. Candice Jones.

For the full statement, click here.

Reopening Schools Is Way Harder Than It Should Be

NY Times – July 23

Of all the American institutions the pandemic has shut down, none face pressure to reopen quite like schools do. Pediatricians exhort schools to open their doors wherever possible or risk developmental harm to kids. Working parents, particularly mothers, are in crisis, worried about having to leave the work force altogether in the absence of a place to send their young children each day. And President Trump is campaigning for schools to reopen, threatening to withhold funding if they don’t.

The pressure has mounted as school districts have made it clear that they can do no such thing. Across the country — including in Phoenix, Houston and a huge chunk of California, where coronavirus cases are rapidly rising — schools are preparing their students and staffs for a continuation of the “remote learning” that began in the spring. In New York City and Chicago, where the virus is more under control, schools are moving toward a hybrid option with remote learning some days, in-person school others. Even in places like Detroit and Memphis, where districts plan to offer in-person school for those who want it, local leaders could change course if virus cases rise; they also have yet to figure out what to do if too many worried teachers or students opt out.

Outrage over schools’ inability to fully reopen should not, of course, be directed at schools themselves, but at the public health failure that makes it impossible for most of them to do so. The consequences of closed or half-open schools, meanwhile, are far vaster than the brutal economic challenge facing working parents and their employers. That’s because schools do much more than provide child care. They provide education, fundamentally. But as the pandemic has made clear, they also provide meals, social connection and health services.

Meeting any one of these needs in normal times through a single institution is a struggle. Add in an out-of-control pandemic that multiplied the number of children who are not getting enough to eat to 14 million, made in-person teaching a health gamble and threw off the learning trajectory of every child in America — all while creating huge projected budget shortfalls for schools — and you have a “train wreck,” said David K. Cohen, a visiting professor of education at Harvard.

Compounding the difficulty is the fact that schools are run locally, autonomy the Trump administration has taken to new extremes by offering reopening instructions that amount to, “good luck.” As a result, many of the country’s 13,000-plus school districts have been left alone to navigate everything from finding masks to deciding what safe classrooms look like — not to mention how to offer widespread and safe food distribution and personalized emotional support in the absence of physical gathering space.

“If you wanted to invent a really weak organization to do all of those things, it would be schools,” Mr. Cohen said. “But the reality is, schools are what families have. Especially poor families and Black and brown families.”

So if the first sin was failing to control the pandemic, the second was letting the virus run wild in a country ill-suited to handle the cascading consequences. The people left to figure it out are superintendents, school board members, teachers and parents, for whom that simple word “reopen” actually entails a dizzying array of interlocking problems. The people who will pay the eventual price are America’s children, for years to come.

Let’s start with child care, which translates, at the barest minimum, to providing every child with a safe place to go so their parents can work and so that they can learn. For schools to play that role, they require two basic ingredients: sufficient physical space and willing and capable adult caregivers. But how much space and how many adults?

That calculation starts with public health considerations. Exactly what part open schools play in spreading the virus is still unknown, but new research suggests that kids age 10 to 19 can transmit it at rates similar to adults. And with case numbers still rising in the United States, school reopenings in places like Denmark that have contained the virus aren’t fitting guides to what would lie ahead here if districts heeded Mr. Trump’s call to bring students back.

Skyrocketing cases in some parts of the country have rendered this conversation moot, with school districts and health departments deciding they cannot take the risk of opening school doors at all. But even if other districts decide they can open, superintendents have to take into account two other variables in addition to space: parents’ willingness to send their children to in-person school and teachers’ willingness to show up and teach them. …

Why would anyone listen to anyone in this administration; especially given what’s going on right now? An extra 100k plus are going to die because a bunch of governors chose to listen to Trump and not to the scientists. Opinions, everyone has one and they all stink. Whence this giving equal credance to ill informed opinions? Who will rid us?

But what about the teachers?

Last week, The New York Times reported on internal documents created by the CDC, citing concern that fully reopening K-12 schools would pose the “highest risk” of spreading the deadly virus. …

As Trump Demanded Schools Reopen, His Experts Warned of ‘Highest Risk’

NY Times – July 10

WASHINGTON — Federal materials for reopening schools, shared the week President Trump demanded weaker guidelines to do so, said fully reopening schools and universities remained the “highest risk” for the spread of the coronavirus.

The 69-page document, obtained by The New York Times and marked “For Internal Use Only,” was intended for federal public health response teams to have as they are deployed to hot spots around the country. But it appears to have circulated the same week that Vice President Mike Pence announced that the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention would release new guidelines, saying that the administration did not want them to be “too tough.” It is unclear whether Mr. Trump saw the document, nor is it clear how much of it will survive once new guidance is completed.

(The cover page of the document is dated July 8, 2019, an obvious typographical error since the novel coronavirus did not exist then.)

What is clear is that federal health experts are using a road map that is vastly different from what Mr. Trump wanted.

While it is mostly a compilation of C.D.C. documents already posted online, it includes reopening plans drafted by states, districts and individual schools and universities. And the package, from the Community Interventions and Critical Populations Task Force, is pointed.

In a “talking points” section, the material is critical of “noticeable gaps” in all of the K-12 reopening plans it reviewed, though it identified Florida, Oregon, Oklahoma and Minnesota as having the most detailed.

“While many jurisdictions and districts mention symptom screening, very few include information as to the response or course of action they would take if student/faculty/staff are found to have symptoms, nor have they clearly identified which symptoms they will include in their screening,” the talking points say. “In addition, few plans include information regarding school closure in the event of positive tests in the school community.”

And its suggestions for mitigating the risk of school reopenings would be expensive and difficult for many districts, like broad testing of students and faculty and contact tracing to find people exposed to an infected student or teacher. …