Exactly. How many people do you know that got the in the past few years despite getting a flu shot? I'm inclined to think we just need to plow ahead here, and protect who needs to be protected. Can we move the vulnerable to online teaching? If not, well....
What did Teddy Roosevelt say, something about greatest good for the greatest number? What's America's greatest resource?

Quote:

---

Instead of thinking of the impact this has on kids, shift the focus to teachers.

---

I think schools have 3 options when trying to move forward:
1) Conduct school normally as if there is no Covid-19
2) Hybrid model with some kids at school and some at home working online
3) All online

Option 1 - Would guarantee the greatest level of employment and would be the most effective, but health & safety will be sacrificed to some extent.

Option 2 - Will likely result in kids or teachers showing up with Covid and forcing most students to go online. This will eventually result in Option 3.

Option 3 - While safest for everyone, it is ineffective and requires a much smaller staff and minimized expenses. Taxpayers will demand a decreased tax rate, and should. This will result in severe budget cuts. I imagine over 50% of staff would be laid off. How would this be good for teachers?

et98 said:

---

Quote:

---

Instead of thinking of the impact this has on kids, shift the focus to teachers.

---

I think schools have 3 options when trying to move forward:
1) Conduct school normally as if there is no Covid-19
2) Hybrid model with some kids at school and some at home working online
3) All online

Option 1 - Would guarantee the greatest level of employment and would be the most effective, but health & safety will be sacrificed to some extent.

Option 2 - Will likely result in kids or teachers showing up with Covid and forcing most students to go online. This will eventually result in Option 3.

Option 3 - While safest for everyone, it is ineffective and requires a much smaller staff and minimized expenses. Taxpayers will demand a decreased tax rate, and should. This will result in severe budget cuts. I imagine over 50% of staff would be laid off. How would this be good for teachers?

---

I don't see those as the options. Not everything is binary. But to make this argument more productive those options are whole school focused, and there should be different rules for teachers/staff/students.

Basically, what I find silly is all the protections and precautions being put in place are student focused. If that is the way this is going we won't go anywhere, because kids will turn up with this (and quickly). Then what?

You can have an Option 1 if you make the entire goal of this to protect and bubble the teachers. There is little chance Option 1 works once you get 10% of teachers infected. Maybe even 1%. Then you tolerate whatever you get kid wise, up to even to absurd rates of 30-40%.

TLDR: The entire re-open school concept then is IMO being short sighted and too much "Won't someone please think of the children.", when we shouldn't think about the children, like at all.

Can we send all kids / teachers away to a hotel / bubble somewhere and they can come back in a year???

et98 said:

---

Quote:

---

Instead of thinking of the impact this has on kids, shift the focus to teachers.

---

I think schools have 3 options when trying to move forward:
1) Conduct school normally as if there is no Covid-19
2) Hybrid model with some kids at school and some at home working online
3) All online

Option 1 - Would guarantee the greatest level of employment and would be the most effective, but health & safety will be sacrificed to some extent.

Option 2 - Will likely result in kids or teachers showing up with Covid and forcing most students to go online. This will eventually result in Option 3.

Option 3 - While safest for everyone, it is ineffective and requires a much smaller staff and minimized expenses. Taxpayers will demand a decreased tax rate, and should. This will result in severe budget cuts. I imagine over 50% of staff would be laid off. How would this be good for teachers?

---

Then, Option 1?

If current surge continues in Texas, it will be Option 3. We will still pay our crazy high property taxes and. . .no teachers will be laid off. Most contracts like mine are term, and I have it signed. To terminate, I must be given cause and allowed a hearing. My teacher organization will provide legal counsel.

rojo_ag said:

---

et98 said:

---

Quote:

---

Instead of thinking of the impact this has on kids, shift the focus to teachers.

---

I think schools have 3 options when trying to move forward:
1) Conduct school normally as if there is no Covid-19
2) Hybrid model with some kids at school and some at home working online
3) All online

Option 1 - Would guarantee the greatest level of employment and would be the most effective, but health & safety will be sacrificed to some extent.

Option 2 - Will likely result in kids or teachers showing up with Covid and forcing most students to go online. This will eventually result in Option 3.

Option 3 - While safest for everyone, it is ineffective and requires a much smaller staff and minimized expenses. Taxpayers will demand a decreased tax rate, and should. This will result in severe budget cuts. I imagine over 50% of staff would be laid off. How would this be good for teachers?

---

Then, Option 1?

If current surge continues in Texas, it will be Option 3. We will still pay our crazy high property taxes and. . .no teachers will be laid off. Most contracts like mine are term, and I have it signed. To terminate, I must be given cause and allowed a hearing. My teacher organization will provide legal counsel.

---

I know it's obvious that I would vote for Option 1. But I'd bet my next paycheck that we will end up with Option 3, regardless of what we start with. The odds of Option 1 happening are probably 0, although that's what I'd prefer.

I don't see this as a question of what is right or wrong, but a question of what are we going to do about it. You may indeed feel that this virus does not justify government overreach to contain it. You may even be right. . .But. What does the overwhelming majority of leaders, healthcare workers, experts, and the general public feel about the virus?

Telling people to just quit their job if they don't like it pushes your narrative, but your resolution doesn't resonate in the current climate.

Sadly. I am of the same opinion.

tysker said:

---

If a person doesn't like the environment and safety protocols or their workplace, quit!

---

This is kind of how I feel about it, too.

But keep in mind that while teachers could just quit and get a different job, students can't quit. Not going to school is a crime. So while I agree with you, our current laws prohibit kids from making that choice to quit.

This is one of the reasons I keep making myself focus on the students and not the teachers.

rojo_ag said:

---

I don't see this as a question of what is right or wrong, but a question of what are we going to do about it.

---

Me too. Every solution is a terrible one. There is no right answer. None of them really make any sense and they all suck. We just have to pick the one that's least terrible, wrong, and nonsensical.

Maybe the answer is different for everyone and we open up the "school choice" discussion once again. Let each district, or even better yet...different schools within the same district...try different things and let the parents decided which school is best for them. Perhaps one of the solutions will become obvious to everyone as the best one, and everyone will agree and there will no longer be a debate. Or perhaps society will continue to be divided on the best idea and parents will keep their kids in the school of their choice. Win-win?

culdeus said:

---

Not sure what the toughest issue(s) are to solve, trying to list them here.

• How to manage substitute teaching where school continues while a teacher is recovering. Main issue being the students had contact with the teacher, and you are asking someone to enter that environment. This seems unrealistic.

• What caseload, or situation would cause school to be shut down/cancelled for a period of time? Is it student based or teacher based?

• What are the requirements for a student to return post positive test? If they show no symptoms will they join online programs? Or just sit it out?

• High.School.Football. How? One proposal is move this to the spring. This makes the most sense.

• If the idea is to keep kids somewhat in homerooms how do you mange selected classes like foreign languages and clubs/extracurricular?

• After school programs. How?

---

These are all excellent questions that I honestly don't really know the answer to. But they would all need to have answers before we start back with an on-site school program.

Substitutes - I imagine the need for subs will much higher than normal, and there will be many who will refuse to work. With that said, unemployment is at an all-time high, so the pool of potential subs may not be as shallow as we think. If a school uses a hybrid model, subs would not be in as much demand.

What caseload, or situation would cause school to be shut down/cancelled for a period of time?
I have no idea. School districts may actually have some kind of policy for this already (hopefully). They've just never had to use it before.

What are the requirements for a student [or teacher] to return post positive test?
The CDC has put out an advisement on this that involves the # of days since testing positive/probable exposure/symptoms starting/symptoms ending/etc. OR, the school could treat it the way they've always treated every illness. If you feel well enough to come to school, come to school.

High.School.Football. How? One proposal is move this to the spring.
No idea. I don't know how how a modified version could exist at all . All other associated activities like drill team, cheerleaders, marching band would be heavily affected as well if there is no football and with social distancing restrictions, but they could at least exist on an abbreviated scale. No football hurts entire economies believe it or not, so this is a tough one! I had not heard the idea of moving to Spring. That's an interesting idea, but I don't know how I feel about it yet!

Homerooms, foreign languages, clubs/extracurricular, after-school programs
I high school & junior high would have to be conducted normally. Classes are too specialized for homerooms. The idea of moving teachers room-to-room instead of students is an option, but many classes require certain facilities (science labs, CTE classes). Some extra-curricular programs may be diminished or impossible, but many would be fine.

planoaggie123 said:

---

Can we send all kids / teachers away to a hotel / bubble somewhere and they can come back in a year???

---

That was tried for summer camps. It worked, except when it didn't.

Every day that goes by the number of teachers and substitute teachers that have recovered from the virus grows.

If we start school up then it is reasonable to expect some teachers to get sick.
A significant percentage (25-50%) will get the virus and never experience symptoms.
The average age of teachers in Texas is 42 years old and 77% are female. This low risk demographic is likely to recover easily and be back to teaching in two weeks with some level of immunity.

High risk teachers can be addressed individualy with specific actions to protect them.

et98 said:

---

tysker said:

---

If a person doesn't like the environment and safety protocols or their workplace, quit!

---

This is kind of how I feel about it, too.

But keep in mind that while teachers could just quit and get a different job, students can't quit. Not going to school is a crime. So while I agree with you, our current laws prohibit kids from making that choice to quit.

This is one of the reasons I keep making myself focus on the students and not the teachers.

---

One thing to note about teacher employment is that we are now in the "less than 45 days before reporting to work" period, so just not reporting to work could be problematic as far as breaking a contract is concerned.

I would hope that districts would be very careful in handling situations like that right now.

Why can't students and all teachers/staff wear masks? It is absurd to me to think that all these other places can be open but not schools which are vital to our children's education. Sounds essential to me.

I work in a field where we are 1 foot away from a person who isn't wearing a mask all while throwing aerosols Into the air every time we run the drill. We have been back at work since the beginning of May. Masks work if you wear them.

Younger kids shouldn't need mask.
Teachers of younger kids could just wear N95s and keep their distance.

If a teacher can manage to go to a grocery store and not get sick then I'm sure they could manage to teach a class and not get sick.

LOL.

This whole ordeal...regardless of what side you are on...is all about making unreasonable comparisons...you have to understand that!

Cy Fair ISD is voting today for $44million to ensure all students have laptops and WiFi capabilities for "possible" at home learning.
I fear this is the direction we are headed.
Many will look at the Ivy League schools as precedent- already announced on line in the fall, football in the spring.

I'm seriously considering homeschooling my three. It will be HARD and I would be doing it while running a business but at least they would have a routine that likely wasn't interrupted and a proven tried and true method.

Big Al 1992 said:

---

Cy Fair ISD is voting today for $44million to ensure all students have laptops and WiFi capabilities for "possible" at home learning.
I fear this is the direction we are headed.
Many will look at the Ivy League schools as precedent- already announced on line in the fall, football in the spring.

---

I hope people consider it is a lot easier for college age kids to learn remotely compared to elementary aged.

I dont think people will try and align the learning capability of kids in Ivy Leage vs kids in Elementary. All levels of governement / state institutions can't help but to waste money. Call me debbie downer but probably some indirect kickbacks involved.

I do think the Ivy League precendent on sports could actually have more impact than some people probably want to think...

We are planning to send our daughter back to school in person; however, if the district tries and reverse course wife and I have been discussing doing home-school vs the s_ show that is pubically driven remote learning.

I think a lot of kids with higher-educated parents will likely consider doing the same and will be interesting to see how quickly they are to jump back into public school the following year(s)....

One slight positive is Plano sent an email last night doubling down on the "in-school" option still being a "go"...

Not to discourage you from home schooling independently because I do feel like that's a viable option, but don't judge the district's virtual learning by last spring's emergency learning. Teachers had no training then. Districts didn't have structures in place to support teachers and students and were responding to a sudden mandate. I'm hopeful that we will be much more successful in the fall, especially in a district like Plano.