COVID-19/Coronavirus thread

[Balta1701]

4 minutes ago, Chisoxfn said:

I would think the risk of a grocery store employee is much higher than the risk of a teacher.  Grocery store employee comes across 100's of people multiple days a week, vs. teacher who spends more time with a smaller group of children.  Both have risks, but I think the person working the grocery and/or bagging groceries is much higher.  

Not when there's a minimum amount of virus that you must inhale in order to actually become infected. That's why masks are potentially effective in the first place; if the tiniest bit of virus got you sick (measles does this), then a mask does very little because it can't block every virus particle. Instead, the masks drop the dose that a person exhales, so that even if a person is walking around giving off the virus, there are fewer people likely to receive an infectuous dose.

This is why restaurants and bars and gyms are such hotspots. You are in single spots, with people talking/exhaling, for tens of minutes at a time, maybe more than an hour at a time.  You get a large dose, and being 6 feet away doesn't really help you. This is why it is doesn't create super-spreader events outside, because air mixes rapidly so even if 1 person gets an infectuous dose, the surrounding crowd is unlikely to do so. 

That isn't to say grocery store workers can't get it, if they have someone come through with no protection and they spread it into the full store environment, they could be inhaling it from that one person for hours - that's how we've gotten major outbreaks at a few grocery stores. But this is why restaurants and bars are things people are commenting on as transmission sites far more than grocery stores. Masks are pretty effective over a few minutes even if a person is sick. They're not very effective over tens of minutes in confined spaces, you need true isolation/full medical PPE in that case. 

[Soxbadger]

17 minutes ago, Dick Allen said:

I don't have kids so I really have no idea what the deal is. This past spring, we have never had anything like this, so I could understand not being totally prepared for on line learning, but have they not been working on this the past couple of months? Improve it. Have a virtual classroom where teachers can call on students. Make it easy for them to have the teacher check their work. It doesn't seem too complicated. For those students without a computer, get them one. It doesn't take a $2000 model to run something like this. 

 

Last year they had months to figure out something better than putting up links on a website and using programs on a tablet and they couldnt do it. My kid is young, so its not a huge deal, but she had 2 teachers. 1 teacher did almost nothing. She did not even ask that homework be turned in or review anything. I would send emails that would go unanswered for days about links/passwords etc that werent correct for the work that was supposed to be done. This is supposed to be a full time job. If youre not in the classroom, youre not grading work and your just posting links once a week, what is exactly being done with the rest of the day? On the other hand, the other teacher was putting a lot more effort in. She had sign ups each week for 1 on 1 with students. She asked that all work be turned in and would respond daily. 

I was absolutely fine with the idea of virtual/outside of the class learning, until after that experience. They had every chance to shine and make it work, but instead didnt. I dont even know what the excuse could possibly be for not having a class wide meeting every single day for 1-2 hours. What else was being done with that time?

Its not even my child Im arguing for. Im lucky, my job is letting me do whatever I want right now. I was able to sit next to her and teach while I did my work. But some kids have parents who work at grocery stores etc who have to go to work so that the rest of us can eat. What are they supposed to do with their kids all day? I

 

8 minutes ago, Balta1701 said:

Not when there's a minimum amount of virus that you must inhale in order to actually become infected. That's why masks are potentially effective in the first place; if the tiniest bit of virus got you sick (measles does this), then a mask does very little because it can't block every virus particle. Instead, the masks drop the dose that a person exhales, so that even if a person is walking around giving off the virus, there are fewer people likely to receive an infectuous dose.

This is why restaurants and bars and gyms are such hotspots. You are in single spots, with people talking/exhaling, for tens of minutes at a time, maybe more than an hour at a time.  You get a large dose, and being 6 feet away doesn't really help you. This is why it is doesn't create super-spreader events outside, because air mixes rapidly so even if 1 person gets an infectuous dose, the surrounding crowd is unlikely to do so. 

That isn't to say grocery store workers can't get it, if they have someone come through with no protection and they spread it into the full store environment, they could be inhaling it from that one person for hours - that's how we've gotten major outbreaks at a few grocery stores. But this is why restaurants and bars are things people are commenting on as transmission sites far more than grocery stores. Masks are pretty effective over a few minutes even if a person is sick. They're not very effective over tens of minutes in confined spaces, you need true isolation/full medical PPE in that case. 

 

Again not a scientist, but it seems a gym and restaurant arent comparative to a school.  A gym and restaurant have a client base that is varied. They have random people coming every day. A school is isolated. The teacher is going to be exposed to the same people every day. 

[Balta1701]

1 minute ago, Soxbadger said:

Again not a scientist, but it seems a gym and restaurant arent comparative to a school.  A gym and restaurant have a client base that is varied. They have random people coming every day. A school is isolated. The teacher is going to be exposed to the same people every day. 

Ok, as long as we put all 50 million school children in NBA style bubbles away from their families, we're in good shape. Now we have a plan. 

[Soxbadger]

Just now, Balta1701 said:

Ok, as long as we put all 50 million school children in NBA style bubbles away from their families, we're in good shape. Now we have a plan. 

 

What school has 50mil kids? Arent we talking about a classroom of 15 students? Cant we minimize interaction outside of that classroom while they are in school?

Im sure that every teacher has been in complete isolation since March, none of them have gone to restaurants etc. Because isnt it hypocritical to be going outside and doing things, and then being too scared to teach a child?

If you want 100% virtual learning, than shouldnt the expectation be that the teacher is actually providing learning? I was 100% for it, but the experience proved teachers were incapable of the responsibility.

Shouldnt they have to provide me a plan that shows that they can do it now?

[Balta1701]

5 minutes ago, Soxbadger said:

 

What school has 50mil kids? Arent we talking about a classroom of 15 students? Cant we minimize interaction outside of that classroom while they are in school?

Im sure that every teacher has been in complete isolation since March, none of them have gone to restaurants etc. Because isnt it hypocritical to be going outside and doing things, and then being too scared to teach a child?

If you want 100% virtual learning, than shouldnt the expectation be that the teacher is actually providing learning? I was 100% for it, but the experience proved teachers were incapable of the responsibility.

Shouldnt they have to provide me a plan that shows that they can do it now?

1. Great. Tell me how you're going to put that in writing and verify it as an offer to the teachers unions before you complain about those unions, because literally no one is describing that for any school. Instead you're going to send the parents, especially the low-income parents, back out into the world, where they can pick it up, bring it home, and use a kid as a bridge to infect the teacher. 

2. If 1/3 of the teachers have been hiding indoors that would be a lower rate than most of the country. Are you ready to replace 1/3 of the teachers in your kid's school over the next month if they opt out/quit?

3. 50 million is the school population in the US. I guess your school can do an NBA style bubble where all the kids live and sleep on the premises 24/7 and that is a reasonable strategy. Not quite sure the logistics will work out for everyone though.

[Soxbadger]

21 minutes ago, Balta1701 said:

1. Great. Tell me how you're going to put that in writing and verify it as an offer to the teachers unions before you complain about those unions, because literally no one is describing that for any school. Instead you're going to send the parents, especially the low-income parents, back out into the world, where they can pick it up, bring it home, and use a kid as a bridge to infect the teacher. 

2. If 1/3 of the teachers have been hiding indoors that would be a lower rate than most of the country. Are you ready to replace 1/3 of the teachers in your kid's school over the next month if they opt out/quit?

3. 50 million is the school population in the US. I guess your school can do an NBA style bubble where all the kids live and sleep on the premises 24/7 and that is a reasonable strategy. Not quite sure the logistics will work out for everyone though.

1) If you want to get legal, the teachers have no leverage here. Here is what they can strike over: 

Section 4.5 of the Illinois Educational Labor Relations Act (IELRA), which restricted mandatory subjects which the Board and the Union must negotiate to only wages, hours, benefits and contract length. Section 4.5 also created “permissive” subjects we can bargain over if both sides agree: class size, class staffing and assignment, class schedules, academic calendar, and length of the workday and school year. Unlike every other teacher in the state, 4.5 forbids us from striking over these matters.

So there wont be anything in writing because the CPS is making an accommodation that they are not required to by law.  If the teachers struck, it would be illegal. If they want to quit, they can. Im not sure how many teachers and their families can afford quitting their jobs, but I guess we can call each other's bluffs.

2) Again, you are providing no solution. I am completely okay with virtual learning if teachers do it. But they didnt, so why are they now getting the benefit of the doubt. What plan are they presenting to show me that it wont be the same. They got a 3 month break last year on top of 2 weeks of a strike. Add in all other breaks, they worked less than half a year. During that time, what exactly did they do to make it so that kids will get some level of replacement education.

3) 50 million kids dont interact with each other. This is completely a red herring. If it is too dangerous for kids to go to school, it should be too dangerous to go to the grocery store. Its odd, but id think you as a teacher would value education more than this. Because your arguments seem to not care at all about learning. 

Edited July 17, 2020 by Soxbadger

[Balta1701]

20 minutes ago, Soxbadger said:

1) If you want to get legal, the teachers have no leverage here. Here is what they can strike over: 

Section 4.5 of the Illinois Educational Labor Relations Act (IELRA), which restricted mandatory subjects which the Board and the Union must negotiate to only wages, hours, benefits and contract length. Section 4.5 also created “permissive” subjects we can bargain over if both sides agree: class size, class staffing and assignment, class schedules, academic calendar, and length of the workday and school year. Unlike every other teacher in the state, 4.5 forbids us from striking over these matters.

So there wont be anything in writing because the CPS is making an accommodation that they are not required to by law.  If the teachers struck, it would be illegal. If they want to quit, they can. Im not sure how many teachers and their families can afford quitting their jobs, but I guess we can call each other's bluffs.

2) Again, you are providing no solution. I am completely okay with virtual learning if teachers do it. But they didnt, so why are they now getting the benefit of the doubt. What plan are they presenting to show me that it wont be the same. They got a 3 month break last year on top of 2 weeks of a strike. Add in all other breaks, they worked less than half a year. During that time, what exactly did they do to make it so that kids will get some level of replacement educataion.

3) 50 million kids dont interact with each other. This is completely a red herring. If it is too dangerous for kids to go to school, it should be too dangerous to go to the grocery store. Its odd, but id think you as a teacher would value education more than this. Because your arguments seem to not care at all about learning. 

1. Dude, you're the one who suggested that limiting student activity outside of the classroom for purposes of safety was an option, now you're giving me the legal argument that the teachers can't have any say over that. I think it's obviously not going to happen for a thousand reasons, but you suggested that. 

2. If I could provide a great solution I would. By virtue of the US failing to fix this problem over the last 3 months, there is no great solution. If it's not safe to have 25 people in a classroom, why is it safe for 15 to come and go on alternating days? Its not. Given appropriate preparation in an area and low virus transmissioo=n, you might be able to get it there, but where are the billions of dollars it will take to make that happen? Where are the supplies of protective gear, of face shields, how are you going to regularly test anyone who has flu-like symptoms at a school? My wife knows a teacher planning to buy and surround herself with a transparent shower curtain. University faculty councils are telling their instructors to make sure their wills are updated and telling them to have 2 potential "replacement instructors" lined up for every course.  

3. It is dangerous going to the grocery store, but reasonable precautions can limit that danger. It is much more dangerous going places where you are with the same people for tens of minutes in a confined area, and at the very least major precautions (hospital-level) are required in that circumstance, that's just how this virus works.

The reality is that in either case, it's not going to be a real education. To make it safe, there's not going to be anything resembling group work or social interaction. You're going to be basically learning while in the equivalent of a prison. It's going to be a traumatic situation in either case. But I'm still waiting for the "These need to be open!!!" to explain where the tens of billions of dollars are going to come from to make it happen. Major League Baseball is testing every single one of their players 2x a week, and in the last 2 weeks another 20 or so people have gotten it. That's what has been required to have people 60 feet 6 inches apart, how on Earth can we justify putting 15 people in small rooms?

I'm currently an out of work educator. Frankly, I don't feel safe enough applying for any further positions as one, and am looking for alternative careers currently. This virus and the decisions of Republican politicians to let it run wild has basically ended my career as one.

[Soxbadger]

2 minutes ago, Balta1701 said:

1. Dude, you're the one who suggested that limiting student activity outside of the classroom for purposes of safety was an option, now you're giving me the legal argument that the teachers can't have any say over that. I think it's obviously not going to happen for a thousand reasons, but you suggested that. 

2. If I could provide a great solution I would. By virtue of the US failing to fix this problem over the last 3 months, there is no great solution. If it's not safe to have 25 people in a classroom, why is it safe for 15 to come and go on alternating days? Its not. Given appropriate preparation in an area and low virus transmissioo=n, you might be able to get it there, but where are the billions of dollars it will take to make that happen? Where are the supplies of protective gear, of face shields, how are you going to regularly test anyone who has flu-like symptoms at a school? My wife knows a teacher planning to buy and surround herself with a transparent shower curtain. University faculty councils are telling their instructors to make sure their wills are updated and telling them to have 2 potential "replacement instructors" lined up for every course.  

3. It is dangerous going to the grocery store, but reasonable precautions can limit that danger. It is much more dangerous going places where you are with the same people for tens of minutes in a confined area, and at the very least major precautions (hospital-level) are required in that circumstance, that's just how this virus works.

The reality is that in either case, it's not going to be a real education. To make it safe, there's not going to be anything resembling group work or social interaction. You're going to be basically learning while in the equivalent of a prison. It's going to be a traumatic situation in either case. But I'm still waiting for the "These need to be open!!!" to explain where the tens of billions of dollars are going to come from to make it happen. Major League Baseball is testing every single one of their players 2x a week, and in the last 2 weeks another 20 or so people have gotten it. That's what has been required to have people 60 feet 6 inches apart, how on Earth can we justify putting 15 people in small rooms?

I'm currently an out of work educator. Frankly, I don't feel safe enough applying for any further positions as one, and am looking for alternative careers currently. This virus has basically ended my career as one.

1) I suggested that in school they could limit it. IE No gym class, no recess, eat lunch in the classroom. That is easily enforceable. 

2) So the answer is, tough luck students? Look if I was scared to go back to work, you better believe Id spend hours figuring out a way to convince my boss and clients how I can deliver a similar level of services from my house. When the pandemic hit, I spent those months showing my bosses and clients I could provide similar level of services from my house. Now that they have seen I can do it, they are fine with it. 

Why did teachers not take the same approach? Why did they completely blow off the last few months of last year? How am I supposed to believe that next year they will provide adequate instruction, when they couldnt even provide 1 total hour of instruction over an entire month. Im not trying to be a dick here and I completely understand that its a shitty situation, but teachers are supposed to be professionals. And they know that they have children counting on them. So why in the world were they not busting their ass for the last few months to avoid this?

At some point there are consequences for not doing the work.

3) Because at the end of the day you have to make the best decision from the bad options. The US simply cant afford to punt an entire school year. The best answer would have been for teachers to rise to the occasion and kick ass in a virtual setting. But they failed miserably. So now what. 

People need to take responsibility once in a while. 

[StrangeSox]

1 hour ago, Soxbadger said:

Im not a scientist but id think being exposed to hundreds of people a day is more risky than 15. If they want protecive gear, thats fine.

 

All indications are that length of exposure is one of the biggest factors. It takes a minimum amount of virus to infect you, so the longer you talk to an infected individual, the more you're getting from them. 

You could always catch a string of bad luck and talk to a bunch of infectuous people for very short periods, but being in the same room for long periods of time is riskier than the grocery store.

[StrangeSox]

I'm sorry that online learning sucks but if we go ahead with in-person schools, well, just take a peak at Israel. It won't last long anyway because too many staff and students will have to be regularly quarantined. Oh, and some will die.

 

e: something else to consider is what quality the in-person teaching is going to be anyway. The best practices for at least a decade now are lots of group work and interaction and one-on-one guidance. None of that is really possible. Lecturing, especially to younger kids, is the worst thing you can do. But that's the only real option for in-person right now. 

Edited July 17, 2020 by StrangeSox

[Balta1701]

7 minutes ago, Soxbadger said:

1) I suggested that in school they could limit it. IE No gym class, no recess, eat lunch in the classroom. That is easily enforceable. 

2) So the answer is, tough luck students? Look if I was scared to go back to work, you better believe Id spend hours figuring out a way to convince my boss and clients how I can deliver a similar level of services from my house. When the pandemic hit, I spent those months showing my bosses and clients I could provide similar level of services from my house. Now that they have seen I can do it, they are fine with it. 

Why did teachers not take the same approach? Why did they completely blow off the last few months of last year? How am I supposed to believe that next year they will provide adequate instruction, when they couldnt even provide 1 total hour of instruction over an entire month. Im not trying to be a dick here and I completely understand that its a shitty situation, but teachers are supposed to be professionals. And they know that they have children counting on them. So why in the world were they not busting their ass for the last few months to avoid this?

At some point there are consequences for not doing the work.

3) Because at the end of the day you have to make the best decision from the bad options. The US simply cant afford to punt an entire school year. The best answer would have been for teachers to rise to the occasion and kick ass in a virtual setting. But they failed miserably. So now what. 

People need to take responsibility once in a while. 

1. Why is it the teachers' responsibility that all these places opened up when they shouldn't have? It seems like you're angry at them regardless of how well quarantined they might have been. Personal responsibility swings both ways - if people aren't responsible under these circumstances, then they don't get schools opened. They haven't been. Abbott and DeSantis told everyone to go to bars and restaurants, so they did. 

2. I don't know what situation you had where your student only got "1 total hour of instruction over an entire month", but that doesn't sum up the final classes i taught. They were pieced together, we had lots of technical issues to struggle with, I didn't get to spend as much time one on one with all 55 students as I wanted, and yeah in the end I lost some who just checked out because I couldn't keep an eye on them, but the last class required the equivalent of weeks of preparation to get ready and I did the best I could. Content was available for several hours a day for that class, if the students chose to access it. I know of others at the grade school level in this area who were spending many hours working on things when they could, and teachers were treating it like full-time jobs. What specifically happened in your district, I don't know. 

[Soxbadger]

3 minutes ago, StrangeSox said:

I'm sorry that online learning sucks but if we go ahead with in-person schools, well, just take a peak at Israel. It won't last long anyway because too many staff and students will have to be regularly quarantined.

Are you okay with teachers forfeiting a salary that is reciprocal to the reduced work load.

I feel that is a fair compromise. 

[Soxbadger]

Just now, Balta1701 said:

1. Why is it the teachers' responsibility that all these places opened up when they shouldn't have? It seems like you're angry at them regardless of how well quarantined they might have been. Personal responsibility swings both ways - if people aren't responsible under these circumstances, then they don't get schools opened.

2. I don't know what situation you had where your student only got "1 total hour of instruction over an entire month", but that doesn't sum up the final classes i taught. They were pieced together, we had lots of technical issues to struggle with, I didn't get to spend as much time one on one with all 55 students as I wanted, and yeah in the end I lost some who just checked out because I couldn't keep an eye on them, but the last class required the equivalent of weeks of preparation to get ready and I did the best I could. Content was available for several hours a day for that class, if the students chose to access it. I know of others at the grade school level in this area who were spending many hours working on things when they could, and teachers were treating it like full-time jobs. What specifically happened in your district, I don't know. 

1. Im not sure what you are talking about. Im talking about the school instituting policies so that the teachers exposure in minimized.

2.  The district I am talking about is CPS, the one who is instituting the policy. I gave specific examples of how the school year went for the last few months. I would think its the teachers job to present a plan of how they are going to improve and not take 3 months off. I would think that its completely unacceptable that a child only has 1 full class meeting for 20 minutes week. That all of the other work is on a tablet from IXL/Espark (which is not created by the teacher.) So what exactly were they doing?

[Balta1701]

4 minutes ago, Soxbadger said:

Are you okay with teachers forfeiting a salary that is reciprocal to the reduced work load.

I feel that is a fair compromise. 

Are you ok with a large salary increase as hazard pay? 

[StrangeSox]

49 minutes ago, Soxbadger said:

 

What school has 50mil kids? Arent we talking about a classroom of 15 students? Cant we minimize interaction outside of that classroom while they are in school?

Im sure that every teacher has been in complete isolation since March, none of them have gone to restaurants etc. Because isnt it hypocritical to be going outside and doing things, and then being too scared to teach a child?

If you want 100% virtual learning, than shouldnt the expectation be that the teacher is actually providing learning? I was 100% for it, but the experience proved teachers were incapable of the responsibility.

Shouldnt they have to provide me a plan that shows that they can do it now?

LMAO

Try 30-35+ for most middle school and high school at a time, with 3-5 class periods per day. So even if you do an A/B schedule, the teacher is exposed to 90 or so students every day, 180 every week.

I'm sure there have been reckless individual teachers engaging in risky behavior (that was stupidly allowed by officials). Personal hypocrisy doesn't change what reasonable and safe policy is, though. Of the half a dozen teachers I know, none have gone to restaurants or bars or big gatherings at all, aside from one who marched in a BLM protest.

Teachers and administrators were left to scramble and figure out band-aid solutions in a matter of days in the spring. It wasn't good. Hopefully, districts have made at least some improvements. I know at least my wife's has some whole online platform they've purchased that'll be teacher-supported for students who opt for at-home learning. It's still a daunting task, and it's still going to be subpar compared to normal times. But that doesn't change the dangers of shoving dozens of students into thousands of classrooms across the country in the middle of a raging pandemic.

[Chisoxfn]

CA mandating all schools be virtual if you are in a watchlist county (i.e., an area that has too many cases, hospitalizations, etc).  My county is on that list - so this will put pressure on all the school districts in my area which came up with different plans.  I still am left speachless at how poorly the schools and districts, states, etc did to developing better approaches for at home learning.  My impression is it will still be very close to the same.

I actually did a virtual zoom with a private school and I was blown away at the difference in terms of how they are pivoting and preparing.  I want to put all options on the table. If it means I sacrifice and cut cable to find new ways to make sure my kids get the best education in a safe manner, I'll do it.  

[southsider2k5]

4 minutes ago, Soxbadger said:

Are you okay with teachers forfeiting a salary that is reciprocal to the reduced work load.

I feel that is a fair compromise. 

Only if they start getting paid extra for hazard pay, virology, social worker, law enforcement, economic development, babysitter and every other lame excuse that has been made for why kids and teachers need to sacrifice their lives for the economy.

[StrangeSox]

5 minutes ago, Soxbadger said:

Are you okay with teachers forfeiting a salary that is reciprocal to the reduced work load.

I feel that is a fair compromise. 

No, because in a sane and functional society, we would be fully supporting everyone to stay home until we got the pandemic under control. Implementing policy that gives strong incentives for increasing risk is dumb. Vindictively taking money from already underpaid professionals is bad.

[Soxbadger]

1 minute ago, Balta1701 said:

Are you ok with a large salary increase as hazard pay? 

If they are at home why do they need hazard pay?

1 minute ago, StrangeSox said:

LMAO

Try 30-35+ for most middle school and high school at a time, with 3-5 class periods per day. So even if you do an A/B schedule, the teacher is exposed to 90 or so students every day, 180 every week.

I'm sure there have been reckless individual teachers engaging in risky behavior (that was stupidly allowed by officials). Personal hypocrisy doesn't change what reasonable and safe policy is, though. Of the half a dozen teachers I know, none have gone to restaurants or bars or big gatherings at all, aside from one who marched in a BLM protest.

Teachers and administrators were left to scramble and figure out band-aid solutions in a matter of days in the spring. It wasn't good. Hopefully, districts have made at least some improvements. I know at least my wife's has some whole online platform they've purchased that'll be teacher-supported for students who opt for at-home learning. It's still a daunting task, and it's still going to be subpar compared to normal times. But that doesn't change the dangers of shoving dozens of students into thousands of classrooms across the country in the middle of a raging pandemic.

 

Im talking about grade school, k-3, where you can have 1 class of 15 students. Older students obviously can stay home and learn much easier. 

 

Just now, southsider2k5 said:

Only if they start getting paid extra for hazard pay, virology, social worker, law enforcement, economic development, babysitter and every other lame excuse that has been made for why kids and teachers need to sacrifice their lives for the economy.

Why hazard pay if they stay at home every day?

[Chisoxfn]

56 minutes ago, Soxbadger said:

 

What school has 50mil kids? Arent we talking about a classroom of 15 students? Cant we minimize interaction outside of that classroom while they are in school?

Im sure that every teacher has been in complete isolation since March, none of them have gone to restaurants etc. Because isnt it hypocritical to be going outside and doing things, and then being too scared to teach a child?

If you want 100% virtual learning, than shouldnt the expectation be that the teacher is actually providing learning? I was 100% for it, but the experience proved teachers were incapable of the responsibility.

Shouldnt they have to provide me a plan that shows that they can do it now?

Every Union should have been positioning and working with the districts proactively to figure out how to make virtual more effective. It would be a double win - keep everyone safe and ensure a positive teaching experience that at least got closer to an inperson.  My opinion is everyone associated with schools has failed miserably.  I'm sure that hot take will piss people off and maybe I should caveat it more closely that anyone who had the ability to impact the curriculum and how to position and pivot so we were prepared for this has failed.  

[Balta1701]

Just now, Soxbadger said:

1. Im not sure what you are talking about. Im talking about the school instituting policies so that the teachers exposure in minimized.

2.  The district I am talking about is CPS, the one who is instituting the policy. I gave specific examples of how the school year went for the last few months. I would think its the teachers job to present a plan of how they are going to improve and not take 3 months off. I would think that its completely unacceptable that a child only has 1 full class meeting for 20 minutes week. That all of the other work is on a tablet from IXL/Espark (which is not created by the teacher.) So what exactly were they doing?

I cannot answer that, I can only tell you how it went for me. I had a 3x a week class at a university level, and I went with asynchronous options for 2/3 of my course meetings because I didn't want to force students to show up if they were having technical difficulties, everything went on Youtube after I recorded it. I had some organized meetings, but group work became nearly impossible. I had some nice outdoor exercises planned that I had to scrap. 

I also had a "field camp" that i was supposed to teach, which became a virtual class. That one turned into an hour of scheduled instruction per day (recorded for people who couldn't make it), and then 2-4 hours depending on the day of managing office hours, answering questions as well as I could, and working with TAs to get things graded. I couldn't force students to attend it all, but it definitely was not "an hour a week" for anything I did.

[Soxbadger]

Just now, Chisoxfn said:

Every Union should have been positioning and working with the districts proactively to figure out how to make virtual more effective. It would be a double win - keep everyone safe and ensure a positive teaching experience that at least got closer to an inperson.  My opinion is everyone associated with schools has failed miserably.  I'm sure that hot take will piss people off and maybe I should caveat it more closely that anyone who had the ability to impact the curriculum and how to position and pivot so we were prepared for this has failed.  

They did fail miserably. The teachers in my district received a 3 month vacation and I did all the work. 

[Soxbadger]

Just now, Balta1701 said:

I cannot answer that, I can only tell you how it went for me. I had a 3x a week class at a university level, and I went with asynchronous options for 2/3 of my course meetings because I didn't want to force students to show up if they were having technical difficulties, everything went on Youtube after I recorded it. I had some organized meetings, but group work became nearly impossible. I had some nice outdoor exercises planned that I had to scrap. 

I also had a "field camp" that i was supposed to teach, which became a virtual class. That one turned into an hour of scheduled instruction per day (recorded for people who couldn't make it), and then 2-4 hours depending on the day of managing office hours, answering questions as well as I could, and working with TAs to get things graded. I couldn't force students to attend it all, but it definitely was not "an hour a week" for anything I did.

And if that is the plan CTU wants to present, Im fine with it. But right now they have shown 0 initiative to pitch how they are going to improve. 

This was what happened last year.

Website is uploaded with links to material from outside sources. 1 20 minute google meeting.

Repeat every week.

[Soxbadger]

4 minutes ago, StrangeSox said:

No, because in a sane and functional society, we would be fully supporting everyone to stay home until we got the pandemic under control. Implementing policy that gives strong incentives for increasing risk is dumb. Vindictively taking money from already underpaid professionals is bad.

Its not vindictive, its life. If teachers want to prove that they can handle virtual learning, then prove it. But last year they showed they were incapable.

[Balta1701]

1 minute ago, Chisoxfn said:

Every Union should have been positioning and working with the districts proactively to figure out how to make virtual more effective. It would be a double win - keep everyone safe and ensure a positive teaching experience that at least got closer to an inperson.  My opinion is everyone associated with schools has failed miserably.  I'm sure that hot take will piss people off and maybe I should caveat it more closely that anyone who had the ability to impact the curriculum and how to position and pivot so we were prepared for this has failed.  

FWIW, I think some of that work has happened, but all that extra skills training over the summer...costs money.