Some combo of the above.

In-personal schooling is more crucial to younger children so I think elementary schools should try to accommodate as many children as they can for in person learning. High schools may have to wait longer. Children with special needs or from low-income families should be prioritized.

There will be long term negative effects from kids missing out on a proper education. Potentially worse than a few COVID cases.

Should remain on-line until the risk is less.

I don’t have an immediate, direct personal stake in this question, but it concerns me as a matter of major importance for the community at large.

And I don’t have an answer. But it seems obvious to me that a solution for kindergartners and a solution for high school students are going to be different.

I think relying on computers as the backbone for this is a really bad idea. Honestly, I would rather rely on churches, and that’s saying a lot. For one thing, computer experience is so easily manipulated and hijacked, even more so than TV. For another, churches don’t actually have to be plugged into the power grid.

The existing educational system, imperfect though it may be, is a structure that can be used. It may have to be adapted as drastically as a scene in a postapocalyptic movie where some 20th-century device (a car, let’s say, or a washing machine) is put to some utterly unintended use because that’s all it’s good for now without power or fuel.

I think we are in something like an apocalyptic scenario now, and we have to think of a lot of things in terms of their bare-bones potential and how else they can be used. Education is one of them.

But I think it’s going to take us about a decade to get that, while too many opportunities pass out of reach forever.

And that is my optimistic view.

I’ve expressed my desire for my state/town to return to in-school instruction and allow other areas of the country to handle based on their situation.

However, this isn’t just a matter of determining how kids will continue to learn. If kids are not in school, that means that they are alone in the house all day. So, 6 year olds are supposed to hang around by themselves while taking some instruction and learning on their own.

The alternative is something that neither corporate party is willing to fight for, so it’s hardly worth discussing. If you want kids to stay home, you need to pay for parents to stay home. You need to provide a way for people to afford rent/mortgage, utilities, food, etc while they stay home to care for their kids and become part of their education. This doesn’t mean so-called “stimulus” scraps. This would mean, regular, large monthly payments that would be paid for by the rich.

We can’t continue to declare that it’s an apocalypse while legislating as though it’s not.

Additionally, I am of the opinion that if we were serious about C19 and limiting its damage, we would have been able to figure out how fund schools in a way that would make safe return a possibility. As it is right now, schools seem to be struggling to simply hold on to their existing staff. And while distancing has become an important component of safety, we’re still looking at educating our children in cramped buildings with limited opportunity for increasing spacing, etc.

Again, if we were serious about prioritizing education or saving lives, we wouldn’t think of schools as physical buildings that are funded with the leftovers. There are plenty of stupid empty buildings all of the country (from office space to convention centers to gyms) that could be setup to expand classroom size and be able to bring students back for meaningful in-person education.

It could be considered a lack of creativity if there was any evidence. There is plenty of creativity when it comes to finding ways to fuck people over. The lack of real solutions re: education and covid is simply a lack of interest. Rich people are going to be fine. The wealthy around here are fine. They all have private tutors and are creating educational mini groups, which will involve gathering small groups of kids together daily and hiring private teachers. The rest of us are screwed.

^Plenty of buildings, but lack of teachers.

I believe that it should be decided on a district by district level, ideally with input from teachers and parents. That state of the pandemic varies so widely from region to region that there is not “one size fits all.” The Federal government should be providing block grants to regional school districts for public schools only to be used as they need to to provide education. They should not be mandating any decisions nationally.

If they do open, I think there should be options for parents who opt out of sending them.

Personally, If I had school aged children I’m not sure what I would decide as to whether to send them back. I’m very glad I don’t have to make that decision.

At the university where I teach, it is partially up to me. I’m on a small committee deciding such things).

Our recommendation, which I think can be applied throughout education, was to employ a flexible hybrid model.

Basically, teacher are required to prepare a 80–100% online course using whatever their school’s LMS is (Google Classroom, Canvas, Blackboard, etc.)

There are minimum content requirements and teachers must stick to their assigned schedule for all in-person or synchronous online activities. They can also employ asynchronous delivery where appropriate.

Imagine the hybrid model as a sliding scale with fully online on one side and fully in person on the other and lots of options in between. This can be broken up by days or weeks. Best of all, it’s responsive. If the virus subsided, slide more in-person. If it gets worse, slide to fully online.

Obviously, the starting point on this scale should be determined by grade, district by district with feedback from parents and teachers being taken into account.

At the college level (and maybe high school) it can be on a teacher by teacher basis, which is what we’re doing.

My daughter’s high school is going with a half day hybrid model with the option for individual students to choose to just go fully online.

On-line schools would be best. There is too much virus and too much unknown about the virus to get schools open they way they were. It will all come out in the wash very soon…
There will be a problem with education as it concerns some students, but it cannot be helped or avoided.

I made it to Target the other day, and I saw a young mother with a grade-school-age kid studying on the school supplies. She looked to me like someone who didn’t have a lot to spend. I heard her voicing her confusion and doubt about how much she should or shouldn’t purchase, not knowing whether her daughter would be schooling at home or in the classroom.

That’s an aspect of this hugely uncertain time that I hadn’t thought about: how much potential for commercial exploitation the educational aspect (and not just medical and safety concerns) affords, and how hard it must be for people of limited means to know what they really need to provide and pay for out of pocket.

Currently, an unwinnable argument

We have our grandson with us. The local school district has decided (wisely, IMHO) to start the first eight weeks remotely, with the option of extending the remote learning as needed.

@Demosthenes _”...Potentially worse than a few COVID cases.”

I don’t think you have a clue how an exponential growth curve works. (Hint: Try folding paper more than 7 times).

The idea of sending kids to school is absolute madness.

Remote learning in most locations with the option for certain families to send students in-person. Each district to determine who qualifies for “certain families”, but at first thought: children of teachers, single-parents who work out of the home, dual working parents with both out of the home, certain academic accommodations (English Language Learners? IEPs?). In-person instruction to be as safe as possible. Any teacher who is not comfortable teaching in-person can teach fully online, either at home or in an empty classroom. Food provided at least weekly to any school district family using remote learning. Mental health and other supportive services offered remotely.

@Cupcake “In-person instruction to be as safe as possible.”

How do you accomplish that? Have you ever seen kids play together? Reopening schools is like pouring gasoline on a fire. I really don’t see how any rational human being could think it’s a good plan.

Hey, teacher…leave them kids alone!

@gorillapaws I am just acknowledging that there are children whose families cannot support at home learning. They may need somewhere to go.

This acknowledgement and desire to plan for these children is not irrational.

@Cupcake “I am just acknowledging that there are children whose families cannot support at home learning.”

IMO that’s the problem that needs to be addressed, not the schooling. If we paid a parent to stay home during the pandemic, suspended rent/mortgages, guaranteed food security and other basics, this would be over a hell-of-a-lot-faster than if we drag it out by sending kids back to school.

@gorillapaws: “IMO that’s the problem that needs to be addressed, not the schooling.”

But it’s not being addressed, and therefore any proposal to keep kids home is not reasonable or possible to much of the country. Any discussion of schooling has to involve the things you mentioned, or it’s absurd.

option 1: take care of the problem and spend lots of money

or option 2: Ignore the problem, kill 100,000’s of people unnecessarily, have it drag out for months longer than it needs to and spend many times more than option 1 because it goes on for so long.

Great. But since nobody has proposed option 1, calling it irrational to discuss some kind of regional-based return to school is unfair – unless you have an alternative. Neither corporate party is providing an alternative.

The only people who are going to suffer under a 100% remote “learning” environment – if people are not paid to stay home – are the working class.

@hmmmmmm “The only people who are going to suffer under a 100% remote “learning” environment – if people are not paid to stay home – are the working class.”

So the solution is to make the problem so bad that it’s worse for the working class and the upper-middle class too?

That’s like there being a flood that’s going to take out 30% of the homes in a poor neighborhood, and the solution is to break the dam so it takes out 80% of the homes in the poor neighborhood but also 60% of the middle class homes and 50% of the upper class homes.. just for equality’s sake.

I don’t think you are understanding what I’m saying at all. The above makes 0% sense in the context of our discussion.

1. I am not saying I have the solution. I am scientifically illiterate and don’t know what should be done.

2. You, however, have proposed a solution.

3. You have also declared that a particular line of thought (thinking that it might be possible to create a scenario that is somewhat safe for children to return in certain areas) is “irrational”.

What I am responding to is #3. I am of the opinion that it’s not at all “irrational” to consider these variables. The alternative – that the working class leaves their kids of all ages at home by themselves or lose their homes – is a pretty serious thing that many people have to live with. To call it “irrational” is ignoring the economic reality of the country.

You have admitted that the government is MIA. And neither corporate party is providing any kind of solution that addresses the real problem,

Some things that you might not be aware of. The upper-middle and upper classes are already handling this in the following ways:
– They can often afford to keep one parent home to be with the kids and manage their learning.
– They are joining together with other parents in groups and hiring teachers/tutors to do small-group teaching.
– They are hedging their bets on private schools in hopes that they are able to open.
– Are hiring lots of curriculum/subject-based online tutors to complement the online “learning” that will be coming.

They are going to be fine. So I’m not sure what your flood metaphor is all about.

So, no – I don’t know what the best solution is. But I really don’t think it’s fair to label working peoples’ concerns as “irrational”.

@hmmmmmm “3. You have also declared that a particular line of thought (thinking that it might be possible to create a scenario that is somewhat safe for children to return in certain areas) is “irrational”.”

Yes, sending kids back to school will result in a massive explosion in new cases. The outcome of this would disproportionately affect the lower classes and disproportionately kill lower and working class people, not to mention completely destroying the economy in the process and saddling them with tens of thousands in medical bills. It’s lunacy and completely irrational.

Well, we’re not going to agree here, and I still think we’re not exactly discussing the same thing.

However, I can say with certainty that I have no idea what’s going to happen in the fall. It’s going to be a shitshow no matter what. My daughter is heading off to college for the first time in a couple of weeks, one of my kids is supposed to start middle school and the other high school. No decision has been made re: the public schools here yet, although I believe the state has shortened the school year by 10 days to delay the start and give districts more time to figure out what is going to happen and how.

@hmmmmmm I guess I really don’t see how it’s possible to reopen schools and not create a super-spreader scenario, unless kids were attending in full hazmat suits or something. Kids are not going to follow social-distancing rules to the necessary degree. One kid could infect dozens of others, and each of those could infect dozens of others. It’s an insane growth curve, and one of the reasons why schools were among the first things to shut down. With the ability of this virus to spread asymptomatically, by the time a community realizes the kids are sick, the whole city/town will be experiencing a huge community-wide outbreak. At that point, reacting by closing schools will be way too little, too late.