Coronavirus (Nice: accepting, home, live)

[joosoon]

Originally Posted by wac_432

This all boils back down to the problem (or non-issue if that's how you feel) of payments to schools being linked to bodies in chairs. Schools don't like students out sick (or travelling or whatever) mainly because they can't get paid for that student that day, yet their expenses don't change. I don't know a better way to arrange the system, but we shouldn't pretend that it is something that it is not.

No doubt that funding is always a part of it but for the time being, any district doing hybrid has no choice in the matter to have something online. I wouldn't say distance-learning doesn't work at all though. I initially thought it was just a stopgap last Spring and that the next year would be wasted doing the same, but both my kids have done well with it. Then again, they've been back for limited in-person since last Fall too so they've had the best offerings available at each stage. As a sort of independent study model though, it's perfectly fine. What gets lost is all the social emotional stuff which is why it's not ideal for primary grades, imo. But sans pandemic, there's ways to compensate for that just as true homeschoolers have always done with their kids (e.g. group activities with other kids in their homeschool circles, etc).


As for online sticking around, covid isn't wiped from the face of the earth and whether you or I think parents are being overly cautious to the point of paranoia, not everyone feels comfortable coming back. The numbers say it all. The problem with not keeping those choosing to stay online enrolled is that it exacerbates the staffing issues and particularly the shortage of teachers out there now. If schools just up and cut those 25-30% of non-returning families, there would have to be huge cuts made and that doesn't help the situation.

[sav858]

Originally Posted by joosoon

It was for the April 12th reopening. I was honestly surprised it was that high but everyone has their reasons.




That's why here in SDUSD, the agreement was to not have hybrid next Fall --so that it wouldn't be a drain on the overall teaching staff, and instead be its own thing with dedicated classes/teachers just for online learning. It's messy the way it is now and it's more work to do both. But it's only going to be that way for two months and the limited Summer programs. I'm curious though why you don't think it should be an option at all? I'm guessing it's because the covid numbers dropping but even so, there's a lot of uncertainty among parents. Perfectly reasonable people I know haven't returned because they don't think the protocols will be followed. And in some cases, they're probably right. Where I work, we have a ton of staff to deal with logistics and administrators are organized and on top of things. Other schools, not so much. I don't blame parents for being skeptical. I have a feeling an online option will persist for at least the next few years. Maybe I'm wrong, but it's the feeling I'm getting when I hear the grand plans.

Yes, sure things may change but with the direction of pandemic here in CA I don't see why it needs to be an option. I think too many are holding onto all these COVID "protocols" and want them to be a permanent of society. All this sanitization stuff is so pointless yet we're still doing it.

[sav858]

Interesting how some of the districts spent their COVID relief money, particularly Fremont and SF. Looking at the waste it should come as no surprise Fremont stayed closed to hybrid/in-person learning and SF has been very slow to open.

Bay Area schools got extra COVID cash. Here’s how they spent it

[TheseGoTo11]

We're 49th in school reopening, and it's because Gavin and many state pols are scared to death of the teachers unions. If the national Republicans actually cared about creating a free economy, and not Jewish Space Lasers or pizzagate, they'd work to reverse the awful bill JFK signed allowing public sector unions. They pound state finances into the ground while defending bad cops and bad teachers, and reducing the quality of services provided to the public.

[sav858]

I noticed more people, not many though, walking around without masks Saturday in Downtown Walnut Creek and Sunday in Golden Gate Park. I wonder how many more people will forgo it now. I'm definitely done with it walking around other pedestrians now.

California relaxes outdoor mask rules for fully vaccinated people, aligns with CDC

The CDC announced Tuesday morning that fully vaccinated Americans don't need to cover their faces outdoors unless they are in a big crowd of strangers. Those who are unvaccinated can go outside without masks in some situations, too.

[wac_432]

Uh, considering how the CDC has unabashedly lied to the public about masks before, in order to try to manipulate people's behavior, I don't trust them any more than I did at the beginning of the pandemic, when they said masks weren't helpful.

I'm pretty sure these new "guidelines" are influenced by the CDC's desire to throw out some carrots to get people to vaccinate themselves.

I'm going to follow the example of the Asians who managed to keep the virus in check and keep masking up around other randos at least until the COVID wave in India is brought under control, and there's conclusive evidence that it is not a more deadly or transmissible (because it sure seems like it is) variant.

[saibot]

Originally Posted by wac_432

Uh, considering how the CDC has unabashedly lied to the public about masks before, in order to try to manipulate people's behavior, I don't trust them any more than I did at the beginning of the pandemic, when they said masks weren't helpful.

I'm pretty sure these new "guidelines" are influenced by the CDC's desire to throw out some carrots to get people to vaccinate themselves.

I'm going to follow the example of the Asians who managed to keep the virus in check and keep masking up around other randos at least until the COVID wave in India is brought under control, and there's conclusive evidence that it is not a more deadly or transmissible (because it sure seems like it is) variant.

That's just fine. No one minds if others choose to wear masks outdoors, as long as they are no longer shooting death glares or yelling verbal threats at those who are not.

[1200RT]

Originally Posted by saibot

That's just fine. No one minds if others choose to wear masks outdoors, as long as they are no longer shooting death glares or yelling verbal threats at those who are not.

Mark my words, that will continue for years to come, regardless of CDC guidance.

[CA4Now]

Originally Posted by Racer46

Since they started counting deaths it is 60,808

That is a minuscule percentage but still a huge number of dead people not counting those who now have permanent damage. You wont find that number.

Just lung damage is...

Because the full course of COVID-19 isn't well understood, the National Institutes of Health announced in February a $1.15-billion initiative to study its long-term effects. Hopefully more will be found out about it.
https://www.nih.gov/about-nih/who-we...udy-long-covid

[TheseGoTo11]

Originally Posted by sav858

I noticed more people, not many though, walking around without masks Saturday in Downtown Walnut Creek and Sunday in Golden Gate Park. I wonder how many more people will forgo it now. I'm definitely done with it walking around other pedestrians now.

Same.

I think the issue is the people who wear masks for the purpose of virtue signaling and other unscientific reasons.