If Trump wants to reopen schools, here’s what his administration needs to do

[homersapien 11,393]

Opinion by

Leana S. Wen

Contributing columnist

July 8, 2020

Vice President Pence says it is “absolutely essential that we get our kids in the classroom for in-person learning.” His remarks Wednesday followed President Trump’s announcement that “we’re very much going to put pressure on governors and everybody else to open the schools” — and a follow-up tweet threatening to cut off funding if schools remain closed.

Pence and Trump are right about the importance of in-person instruction. But the Trump administration can’t just set a timeline without committing to the necessary work to ensure the health and safety of students, teachers and their families.

The single most important requirement for resuming in-person instruction is suppressing the level of covid-19 infections in the community. Imagine if schools tried to open now in areas undergoing massive surges, including Houston, Miami and Phoenix. Groups of children gathering indoors would add fuel to the flame and worsen the crisis. This is why the White House’s own guidelines prohibit schools from reopening until the community has reached Phase 2 — defined, at minimum, as recording a consistent decline in new infections.

Right now, more than 40 states have increasing cases. To reverse this trend, governors will need to reimpose restrictions and make difficult tradeoffs. Some businesses, such as bars and nightclubs, may need to stay closed for the summer to keep virus levels low enough for schools to be open in the fall. The Trump administration needs to support these actions rather than cast doubt on the severity of the current surge.

Another urgent and long overdue step: The administration needs to implement a national testing strategy and substantially ramp up testing capacity. Some schools in Germany require students and staff to pass self-administered covid-19 tests every four days. This would be an option that many U.S. parents and teachers will want, and some proposals, such as pooled testing, may offer a path to do so. Given the current shortage of tests and the lack of agreement on who would pay for testing, that seems unlikely to happen by the fall. At the very least, there must be sufficient tests that all those who have symptoms or exposure could be tested immediately, with results available the same day.

In addition, the community needs to have the capability to conduct contact tracing and regular surveillance. If there is a cluster of infections linked to a particular school, prompt action needs to be taken, including quarantining close contacts and even temporary school closure. This is another reason to suppress the level of virus in the community now: Constant outbreaks will quickly overwhelm the public health infrastructure.

During Wednesday’s news conference, Robert Redfield, director of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, emphasized that his agency’s guidelines are just recommendations — they are not mandatory. Why not? There should be a checklist of, say, 20 things that must be done to ensure safety in schools. The language must be unambiguous. No more nebulous messages such as desks should be spaced apart “when feasible” and communal spaces closed “if possible.” Firm rules don’t limit local autonomy; they provide a clear road map for superintendents, while reassuring parents and teachers.

All these new measures would require enormous amounts of planning. To space students out, there would likely be different configurations of classes, at different hours, that require more buses and additional teachers. New hand-washing and sanitizing stations would need to be installed and new cleaning protocols implemented. Nurse aides might be hired to conduct symptom screenings. Students and staff will need masks and other personal protective equipment. Congress has already allocated $13 billion, but the cost will be much more.

Instead of making a commitment for this needed funding, the Trump administration is attacking local officials who are trying to balance complex competing priorities. Education Secretary Betsy DeVos criticized one of the largest school districts in the country, Virginia’s Fairfax County, for its plan to offer part-time in-person instruction. “A choice of two days per week in the classroom is not a choice at all,” she said.

Actually, a hybrid of remote and in-person teaching may well be the best option. There will be some children who cannot return due to their own health conditions. There will be older teachers with multiple risk factors who can only safely work remotely. The Trump administration needs to support the enormous efforts undertaken by school districts to accommodate vulnerable students and teachers, not to shame and threaten them.

We have already seen what happens when reopening occurs too soon and without the proper safeguards. If getting schools back is the top priority that the Trump administration says it is, it needs to do the hard work and provide the necessary funding to get there. Arbitrary timelines and empty rhetoric will only harm students, parents and teachers.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2020/07/08/if-trump-wants-reopen-schools-heres-what-his-administration-needs-do/

[SaltyTiger 7,816]

Trump is in election year mode. 

https://www.npr.org/2020/07/08/888898194/trump-blasts-expensive-cdc-guidelines-for-reopening-schools

[SocialCircle 570]

From Feb. 1st through now there have been less than 200 people in this country who have died with Covid-19 under the age of 25 years old. There are over 100,000,000 people under 25 in the US. The flu has actually been more deadly for those under age 15 during this same time period.  School aged children are at virtually zero risk of having significant consequences from Covid-19. 
 

Protect the high risk staff members and allow people the choice of in school or online education until a medical remedy is proven effective. 
 

 

[SLAG-91 1,483]

I'm heading into my 24th year of teaching (HS) and am much more concerned about unfeasible and unenforceable mandates being dictated to us than I am about getting sick. My preference is to go back in person, for the record.

I'm thinking about things like social distancing requirements on buses, for instance. Are you going to have an aide on every bus to enforce these rules? The driver can't drive and play keep-away monitor simultaneously.

Some districts are encouraging kids that can take something other than the bus to do so. Drop-off lines at school are going to become much more crowded. If you combine that with mandatory temperature screenings before coming in (who is going to be responsible for administering those? Our school has many points of entry...not likely to have a nurse/nurse's aide at all of them), it would take a very long time to even get everyone in the building.

Fire drills (required monthly in our district)...going to have the kids politely walk out 6' apart, particularly when the goal.is to get out of the building as quickly as possible? Good luck with that. Social distancing and fire drills are basically mutually exclusive, as any teacher will tell you.

If a mask mandate is for kids, say, less than 10 years old...have fun, 4th grade teachers. Most kids turn 10 during the 4th grade, so you'll have mask enforcement for some, but not all. "Happy Birthday, _____, here's your mask!" 

I'll stop there...but the "what about X,Y and Z" list of considerations for schools is seemingly endless.

Our district is offering parents/students the choice of 100% on-line or 100% in-person. I will be interested to see how the numbers shake out on that. No hybrid option.

I am glad I am not the decision-maker here, because there are no good options...just varying degrees of craptastic ones.

[SocialCircle 570]

8 minutes ago, SLAG-91 said:

I'm heading into my 24th year of teaching (HS) and am much more concerned about unfeasible and unenforceable mandates being dictated to us than I am about getting sick. My preference is to go back in person, for the record.

I'm thinking about things like social distancing requirements on buses, for instance. Are you going to have an aide on every bus to enforce these rules? The driver can't drive and play keep-away monitor simultaneously.

Some districts are encouraging kids that can take something other than the bus to do so. Drop-off lines at school are going to become much more crowded. If you combine that with mandatory temperature screenings before coming in (who is going to be responsible for administering those? Our school has many points of entry...not likely to have a nurse/nurse's aide at all of them), it would take a very long time to even get everyone in the building.

Fire drills (required monthly in our district)...going to have the kids politely walk out 6' apart, particularly when the goal.is to get out of the building as quickly as possible? Good luck with that. Social distancing and fire drills are basically mutually exclusive, as any teacher will tell you.

If a mask mandate is for kids, say, less than 10 years old...have fun, 4th grade teachers. Most kids turn 10 during the 4th grade, so you'll have mask enforcement for some, but not all. "Happy Birthday, _____, here's your mask!" 

I'll stop there...but the "what about X,Y and Z" list of considerations for schools is seemingly endless.

Our district is offering parents/students the choice of 100% on-line or 100% in-person. I will be interested to see how the numbers shake out on that. No hybrid option.

I am glad I am not the decision-maker here, because there are no good options...just varying degrees of craptastic ones.

Here is our info:

 

[homersapien 11,393]

Trump is shouting for schools to reopen. He needs an actual strategy.

Opinion by Editorial Board

July 8, 2020 at 6:53 p.m. EDT

PRESIDENT TRUMP has seized upon a new campaign battle cry to reopen the schools this fall, not with distance learning but in person. Mr. Trump’s call reflects a genuine need, felt by parents, teachers and students, to get back to the classroom. In any calculus of recovery, schools must be a priority. But it is important that reopening be done smartly, avoiding Mr. Trump’s previous bungling and leadership bankruptcy.

All over the country this week, teachers, parents, students and administrators are wrestling with the methods of how to accomplish this, knowing the stakes are high. Students have already lost months of work; many parents need to return to jobs; a host of knock-on effects flow from canceled classes, including mental health troubles.

“SCHOOLS MUST OPEN IN THE FALL!!!” Mr. Trump declared on Twitter. But simply shouting the slogan is not a strategy. Schools must avoid hasty miscalculations such as those evident in Mr. Trump’s thoughtless drive in May to reopen states, which badly backfired and led to the present pandemic surge. The current wildfire of infection must be extinguished as a prerequisite to going back to classrooms. If Americans can’t wear masks and stay out of bars and restaurants, they won’t get the school bells ringing soon.

Reopening will also require major new resources that states and localities do not have. Ninety percent of school funding is local, and the governments are struggling under crushing pandemic burdens and tax revenue falloff. Philadelphia School Superintendent William R. Hite Jr. estimated on Wednesday that the city would need $60 million to $80 million more just to meet the requirements of physical distancing, face masks, additional staff to clean and sanitize schools, and proper ventilation in old buildings. Some other estimates are that schools nationwide will need an additional $200 billion to safely reopen. Where is this coming from? A fresh economic stimulus package does not seem imminent from Washington.

Some schools are trying to cope with it all by creating hybrid plans, sharing in-classroom time with online instruction, to which Mr. Trump sniffs, “I think it’s an easy way out.” To make matters worse, Mr. Trump on Wednesday threatened schools in a tweet, “May cut off funding if not open!” How is that going to help? Mr. Trump also ominously insisted he would press the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention — the public health experts — to loosen guidance for school reopenings. He knows better?

Another huge issue that must be faced is the vulnerability of adults. As the group Resolve to Save Lives pointed out, younger people are less prone to get seriously ill, and may not transmit the virus as much as adults. But the viral load in infected children has been shown to be similar to adults. Schoolchildren do not exist in a vacuum, but rather in a web of adult contacts, from parents to teachers, who may be more prone to infection and illness. Nearly a third of public school teachers are 50 or older. It is not a simple matter to just wave a magic wand and declare schools must open.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/trump-is-shouting-for-schools-to-reopen-he-needs-an-actual-strategy/2020/07/08/89e4f084-c150-11ea-b4f6-cb39cd8940fb_story.html

[McLoofus 35,182]

6 hours ago, homersapien said:

Another huge issue that must be faced is the vulnerability of adults. As the group Resolve to Save Lives pointed out, younger people are less prone to get seriously ill, and may not transmit the virus as much as adults. But the viral load in infected children has been shown to be similar to adults. Schoolchildren do not exist in a vacuum, but rather in a web of adult contacts, from parents to teachers, who may be more prone to infection and illness.

Pretty crazy that some still don't get this. 

Sorry to beat a dead horse but it just really is crazy. Like, all of this information has been well established for months now- and much of it is very basic logic- and people still choose to remain ignorant. 

But hey, your kid probably isn't going to die, so whatevs. 

[McLoofus 35,182]

Another thing I'm curious about.- plexiglass, or some similar material. Sooooo many restaurants and other businesses almost immediately had shields up to protect cashiers and such. I realize that it might be prohibitively expensive to roll that out in spaces meant for more bodies, but is it even being discussed? Expensive though it may be, could be a cheaper option than some of the others being discussed. 

[aubiefifty 16,823]

3 hours ago, SocialCircle said:

From Feb. 1st through now there have been less than 200 people in this country who have died with Covid-19 under the age of 25 years old. There are over 100,000,000 people under 25 in the US. The flu has actually been more deadly for those under age 15 during this same time period.  School aged children are at virtually zero risk of having significant consequences from Covid-19. 
 

Protect the high risk staff members and allow people the choice of in school or online education until a medical remedy is proven effective. 
 

 

keep watching the news as this is changing. lots of young folks getting sick now.

[I_M4_AU 7,865]

There are studies that indicate young kids do not transmit the Covid-19 as an adult does.

Kids' coronavirus transmission rates

Stefansson explained that his study showed that "if (children) were infected, they were much less likely (than adults) to infect others." This applied to kids infecting both adults and fellow children, he said.

When asked why there appears to be such a discrepancy between kids' and adults' transmission rates, Stefansson said there's no clear answer yet.

Dr. Rick Malley, an infectious disease pediatrician at Boston Children's Hospital, told TODAY that one possible explanation for this difference between kids and adults relates to the body's immune response to the coronavirus. Because adults may have had more exposure than kids to similar viruses prior to infection, their body could react in a stronger way, he explained.

Dr. Allison Agwu, a professor of infectious diseases at Johns Hopkins School of Medicine in Baltimore, Maryland, pointed to the difference in size between kids and adults as another theory.

"When you think about an adult whose lungs are bigger ... they sneeze or cough, and there's bigger spray than a little kid, who may not be able to generate that much force," she told TODAY. "The mechanics of big people versus little people may be a big part of it."

https://www.today.com/health/covid-kids-how-often-kids-get-infected-transmit-coronavirus-t183803#anchor-Kidscoronavirustransmissionrates

We might be able to open up elementary schools and let middle and high schools do distance learning.

[SocialCircle 570]

1 hour ago, aubiefifty said:

keep watching the news as this is changing. lots of young folks getting sick now.

Lots of young folks get sick every school year from all kind of different things. I’m not concerned necessarily if youngsters get it more. What will get my attention is if those who are 19 and under start getting hospitalized because of Covid-19. I see no evidence so far of this happening. 

[SocialCircle 570]

Also, the guidance on reopening schools that we are receiving is very good. 

[aubiefifty 16,823]

1 minute ago, SocialCircle said:

Lots of young folks get sick every school year from all kind of different things. I’m not concerned necessarily if youngsters get it more. What will get my attention is if those who are 19 and under start getting hospitalized because of Covid-19. I see no evidence so far of this happening. 

that is a pretty crappy thing to say. first off you need to quit getting your science from trump and quit believing fauci has no idea what he is saying. second not being concerned when folks get it and the fact they do not yet know the long term facts is a bad look on your part. and you need to pay attention for real because the main folks in this spike ARE young people. and no i am not going to dig it up for you because you will come up with fake news or some other bull. you are just following trumps wishes just like you are a christian and yet have not uttered a word against trump gassing people at a legal and peaceful protest so he can do a damni wish this was in smack talk so i could say what i really think.......

[aubiefifty 16,823]

5 minutes ago, SocialCircle said:

Also, the guidance on reopening schools that we are receiving is very good. 

change the channel every once in a while and get a different point of view. you keep preaching at the alter of trump and you task up for him every single chance you get on just about anything i have seen. say what you want i see through it and  you care little for other peoples lives which makes you an enabler. to me that means you will have blood on your hands. just like your racist president.

 

[SocialCircle 570]

2 hours ago, aubiefifty said:

that is a pretty crappy thing to say. first off you need to quit getting your science from trump and quit believing fauci has no idea what he is saying. second not being concerned when folks get it and the fact they do not yet know the long term facts is a bad look on your part. and you need to pay attention for real because the main folks in this spike ARE young people. and no i am not going to dig it up for you because you will come up with fake news or some other bull. you are just following trumps wishes just like you are a christian and yet have not uttered a word against trump gassing people at a legal and peaceful protest so he can do a damni wish this was in smack talk so i could say what i really think.......

I am getting my information mostly from the CDC, and the Georgia School Boards Association. You see I actually serve my community in an elected role. I've studied this more than you can imagine. Also, I have a daughter who will be a junior in high school this year. I see no evidence of any long term effects on people under age 19 BTW. 

[SocialCircle 570]

14 minutes ago, aubiefifty said:

change the channel every once in a while and get a different point of view. you keep preaching at the alter of trump and you task up for him every single chance you get on just about anything i have seen. say what you want i see through it and  you care little for other peoples lives which makes you an enabler. to me that means you will have blood on your hands. just like your racist president.

 

I could care less about what any politician on either side says about reopening schools. Here is something from Fauci though:

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.nbcwashington.com/news/local/dr-anthony-fauci-says-reopening-of-schools-depends-on-number-of-infections-in-an-area/2326134/%3famp

And here is what the American Academy of Pediatrics is saying:

 "The AAP strongly advocates that all policy considerations for the coming school year should start with a goal of having students physically present in school. The importance of in-person learning is well-documented, and there is already evidence of the negative impacts on children because of school closures in the spring of 2020. Lengthy time away from school and associated interruption of supportive services often results in social isolation, making it difficult for schools to identify and address important learning deficits as well as child and adolescent physical or sexual abuse, substance use, depression, and suicidal ideation. This, in turn, places children and adolescents at considerable risk of morbidity and, in some cases, mortality. Beyond the educational impact and social impact of school closures, there has been substantial impact on food security and physical activity for children and families." 

[homersapien 11,393]

4 hours ago, McLoofus said:

Another thing I'm curious about.- plexiglass, or some similar material. Sooooo many restaurants and other businesses almost immediately had shields up to protect cashiers and such. I realize that it might be prohibitively expensive to roll that out in spaces meant for more bodies, but is it even being discussed? Expensive though it may be, could be a cheaper option than some of the others being discussed. 

 

School kids in Korea.

[aubiefifty 16,823]

[aubiefifty 16,823]

[SocialCircle 570]

16 minutes ago, aubiefifty said:

It is so ironic that you are the one making this political because of your hate for Trump.  I have zero interest in what any politician thinks about reopening schools.  We are also receiving more guidance everyday from the Georgia Dept. of Education and the Dept. of Public Health. 

[wdefromtx 3,159]

49 minutes ago, aubiefifty said:

This statement is partially incorrect. That babysitting part................obviously they haven't heard about some of the lowest of low SPED programs that are required to be offered in public schools. 

[channonc 466]

6 hours ago, McLoofus said:

Pretty crazy that some still don't get this. 

Sorry to be a dead horse but it just really is crazy. Like, all of this information has been well established for months now- and much of it is very basic logic- and people still choose to remain ignorant. 

But hey, your kid probably isn't going to die, so whatevs. 

I will add that there is starting to be some anecdotal evidence that even if you don't get "seriously ill" the impact on your body, particularly your lungs may be long-term, one may end up developing problems later on as a result of this disease. Couple this with attempts to dismantle the ACA, particularly protections for pre-existing conditions, and we have a very dangerous possibility ahead. Anyone who says otherwise isn't paying attention to medical experts.

[TitanTiger 20,499]

8 hours ago, SocialCircle said:

From Feb. 1st through now there have been less than 200 people in this country who have died with Covid-19 under the age of 25 years old. There are over 100,000,000 people under 25 in the US. The flu has actually been more deadly for those under age 15 during this same time period.  School aged children are at virtually zero risk of having significant consequences from Covid-19. 
 

Protect the high risk staff members and allow people the choice of in school or online education until a medical remedy is proven effective. 

The issue of children themselves dying isn't the only one.  They can bring it home to their parents.  Some live with grandparents in the home.  I'm not saying we shouldn't have in person instruction with proper safety procedures in place (masks, distancing, temperature checks, etc).  But we have to stop making incomplete statistical citations like this.

[SocialCircle 570]

8 minutes ago, TitanTiger said:

The issue of children themselves dying isn't the only one.  They can bring it home to their parents.  Some live with grandparents in the home.  I'm not saying we shouldn't have in person instruction with proper safety procedures in place (masks, distancing, temperature checks, etc).  But we have to stop making incomplete statistical citations like this.

This is why we are offering in school and online schooling to our students.  Each family gets to decide for themselves....as it should be.  What I listed isn't incomplete as I also mentioned we are taking special care of our at risk staff. 

[SocialCircle 570]

1 hour ago, channonc said:

I will add that there is starting to be some anecdotal evidence that even if you don't get "seriously ill" the impact on your body, particularly your lungs may be long-term, one may end up developing problems later on as a result of this disease. Couple this with attempts to dismantle the ACA, particularly protections for pre-existing conditions, and we have a very dangerous possibility ahead. Anyone who says otherwise isn't paying attention to medical experts.

Who is trying to get rid of covering pre-existing conditions?  Also, there is absolutely no evidence so far that children who do get Covid-19 will suffer long-term effects.  Our school system has asked for this evidence and none exists.