Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I hadn't heard about that in Los Angeles, probably because it's new here, in this county where public schooling generally has been mired in low quality and ineptitude for decades.
Busing is a virus transmission risk. Logistically, more buses and drivers would be needed for daily on-campus learning to resume. Your "lack of staffing" I guess refers to pods, but it also applies to schools with newly reduced class sizes (the "capacity" you mentioned), presuming that outdoor classes can't be close to normal size (if they're used at all). Pods can and should be set up almost on a neighborhood basis, to minimize busing (most students would walk instead). As I learned yesterday, schools could even set-up portable, very small classrooms (think trailers) in empty lots, if ventilation and climate control are adequate. My guess is that many public high school students in California will not resume full-time on-campus learning until the fall or later.
No, it's everything. Schools don't operate well on skeleton crews. Schools expected to abide by state and local covid protocols don't operate well with just normal levels of staffing. The policies in place right now for the limited in-person schooling already happening in various districts, isn't the type of thing that can be done at scale with any level of staffing. Larger urban districts have invested a lot of mental energy into what will work, and what won't. A lot of your ideas have been explored and shelved because they're unfeasible; stuff like outdoor classrooms, etc. These might sound great on paper from a very pedestrian view of what it takes to run a school, but in practice they just won't work.
There's still a lot of questions regarding what "reopening" will mean on a broader scale. All current indicators point to hybrid, single cohort schedules to minimize intermixing students as much as possible. That's what we're doing right now and as I've shown you from actual data already, it's worked really well in SDUSD. No outbreaks, no student covid positive cases directly from exposure at school. Then again, our district set the bar really high with the input of actual scientists from UCSD and have crafted a plan based on their recommendations. Reading what our sister district LAUSD is planning, one thing I noticed was they're poised to require covid testing along with a streamlined daily symptom check process. The latter of those makes the ingress and egress of students very time consuming (another reason having large groups of kids on campus at any one time creates a staffing issue). What this all boils down to is no plan is the one right plan. Until the state backs off, districts aren't going wantonly violate edicts from the department of health. But eventually the rules will have to be eased enough to allow districts to operate a bit more freely. The biggest obstacle is still the capacity limits and social distancing.
The "science" doesn't change. What we find out about how the virus is transmitted changes with more research and study. The duration of immunity after both vaccines are administered isn't even known yet.
Well, of course the facts don't really change and I was being facetious and cynical about the "science". I totally agree it's an evolving subject and I doubt anyone will argue that.
What's annoying about the questions of efficacy of the vaccine and duration of immunity is that Newsom made a big deal about his team of doctors who were to determine this in their vaccine review board. Their results (which I've posted before) were to simply echo what the FDA/CDC/the vaccine manufacturers concluded, which was all of those questions are still unknown. Needless to say it was a completely fruitless exercise. The optimist in me still thinks regardless how long immunity lasts, with enough vaccination coverage we can break the chain of transmission --something that seems impossible globally without some sort of outside force at work beyond just mitigation measures like isolating the public, etc.
No, it's everything. Schools don't operate well on skeleton crews. Schools expected to abide by state and local covid protocols don't operate well with just normal levels of staffing. The policies in place right now for the limited in-person schooling already happening in various districts, isn't the type of thing that can be done at scale with any level of staffing. Larger urban districts have invested a lot of mental energy into what will work, and what won't. A lot of your ideas have been explored and shelved because they're unfeasible; stuff like outdoor classrooms, etc. These might sound great on paper from a very pedestrian view of what it takes to run a school, but in practice they just won't work.
Saying without explaining isn't worth much. I don't think anyone believes outdoors full-time for anything works (not even phys ed), but tell us why having some classes outdoors sometimes wouldn't be worth it. I can think of weather and noise as possible impediments and that's it.
Quote:
There's still a lot of questions regarding what "reopening" will mean on a broader scale. All current indicators point to hybrid, single cohort schedules to minimize intermixing students as much as possible. That's what we're doing right now and as I've shown you from actual data already, it's worked really well in SDUSD. No outbreaks, no student covid positive cases directly from exposure at school. Then again, our district set the bar really high with the input of actual scientists from UCSD and have crafted a plan based on their recommendations. Reading what our sister district LAUSD is planning, one thing I noticed was they're poised to require covid testing along with a streamlined daily symptom check process. The latter of those makes the ingress and egress of students very time consuming (another reason having large groups of kids on campus at any one time creates a staffing issue). What this all boils down to is no plan is the one right plan. Until the state backs off, districts aren't going wantonly violate edicts from the department of health. But eventually the rules will have to be eased enough to allow districts to operate a bit more freely. The biggest obstacle is still the capacity limits and social distancing.
I went to a medical appointment this week, and that office has a set-up with a wall-mounted, remote-controlled temperature scan. I think that implemented for school systems would reduce a major logistical problem. If that happens, it wouldn't surprise me if it's permanent and used against other transmissible diseases, maybe the biggest benefit of all this. In Los Angeles, I think other long-term changes need to be made, including smaller class sizes, due to my my belief that COVID-19 is becoming endemic in the county.
Last edited by goodheathen; 03-04-2021 at 10:55 AM..
As far as the restrictions you are minimizing for 2022, families being unable to host weddings, Bar Mitzvahs, funerals, bris ceremonies and other life cycle events for two and three quarters years is not trivial. A Bat Mitzvah scheduled for March 21, 2020 for one of my Rabbi's daughters at age 13 becomes really hard three years later. Does it double as a Sweet Sixteen party? That is, if people don't find a reason for further lockdown.
As as far as your example for dating, I got my now-wife's name and phone number on December 31, 1989 and I called her on January 2 or 3. Our first date was January 6, 1990. If Covid were going around then for a year, should I have asked her vaccination status on that first phone call, or asked her to get a Covid test? What a romantic way to start.
Or funerals. My father-in-law died January 27 of this year. The funeral was set for January 29, 2021. Do you have any idea how difficult the arrangements for an outdoor graveside funeral were, on a day with biting cold and a ripping wind? How long are people going to live this way?
I'm going to skip right over dating. I could argue that some restrictions reduce the sleaziness of dating, and the reality is that early stages of dating include the Internet for many or most people nowadays and that was increasing.
As for special events, to many people, the only ones that matter much are weddings and funerals. Weddings matter most to the couples themselves, and frankly anyone getting married who demands a huge production maybe isn't taking marriage seriously enough and there's a money-grubbing industry around weddings that might as well go away. Also, I'm no wedding expert, but I'm fairly sure that large winter weddings, where virus vs. weather is more salient, have never been standard in most climates. Funerals are tougher to adjust, but this is a pandemic and I think it dishonors the dead to have high-risk ceremonies.
I'm happy to be wrong about something. I mean, I was right about part of it - https://www.yahoo.com/news/obesity-d...142725406.html - but wrong to assume that no Western governments would act on that. That story has (as of this post) a link to the UK implementing an anti-obesity campaign. That said, I'd be very surprised if this much larger country or just this big state does much of anything. I would hope that the LA County Health Department talks about it in upcoming broadcasts.
Funerals are tougher to adjust, but this is a pandemic and I think it dishonors the dead to have high-risk ceremonies.
My father-in-law's funeral consisted of me, wife wife, her twin sister (i.e. both of his daughters), his wife's caregiver, my two sons (i.e. two of his grandsons) and the Rabbi. That's seven people, outdoors, in a 20 mph wind. Hardly high risk. Even with that my synagogue wouldn't provide clergy because my sister-in-law flew in from California. We hired another Rabbi.
A seven-person outdoor funeral on a windy day is not "high-risk."
My father-in-law's funeral consisted of me, wife wife, her twin sister (i.e. both of his daughters), his wife's caregiver, my two sons (i.e. two of his grandsons) and the Rabbi. That's seven people, outdoors, in a 20 mph wind. Hardly high risk. Even with that my synagogue wouldn't provide clergy because my sister-in-law flew in from California. We hired another Rabbi.
A seven-person outdoor funeral on a windy day is not "high-risk."
No, it’s not. It’s also not necessary. Close friend passed last September, leaving wife and two school-age sons in mourning, and pandemic-distanced from family and friends. My wife passed at New Years leaving me and my family and hers and very close-knit disabled community to mourn - without funeral or any close contact for comfort. As I wrote previously, we’ll gather for these ceremonies and rituals when circumstances are clear for the honor. Your loss is shared by hundreds of thousands, millions, around the globe. Life, who knew it includes both death and inconvenient timing, eh?
No, it’s not. It’s also not necessary. Close friend passed last September, leaving wife and two school-age sons in mourning, and pandemic-distanced from family and friends. My wife passed at New Years leaving me and my family and hers and very close-knit disabled community to mourn - without funeral or any close contact for comfort. As I wrote previously, we’ll gather for these ceremonies and rituals when circumstances are clear for the honor. Your loss is shared by hundreds of thousands, millions, around the globe. Life, who knew it includes both death and inconvenient timing, eh?
I'm very sorry for your loss. I think you wrote this from a place of grief, frustration, and also envy that someone else has already been able to arrange a funeral for their loved one while you have not. Reading between the lines, I don't think you really feel that funerals are unnecessary.
I agree with jbgusa that a small group of 7 standing outside for a funeral does not pose any undue risk. I can also understand that many people would choose to wait until they can have a much larger gathering.
I'm very sorry for your loss. I think you wrote this from a place of grief, frustration, and also envy that someone else has already been able to arrange a funeral for their loved one while you have not. Reading between the lines, I don't think you really feel that funerals are unnecessary.
I agree with jbgusa that a small group of 7 standing outside for a funeral does not pose any undue risk. I can also understand that many people would choose to wait until they can have a much larger gathering.
Thank you. But you have, reasonably, misunderstood my comment. It isn’t that funerals are necessary or unnecessary. It’s that the timing of the honor is flexible according to circumstances.
Thank you. But you have, reasonably, misunderstood my comment. It isn’t that funerals are necessary or unnecessary. It’s that the timing of the honor is flexible according to circumstances.
I do sometimes wonder, when I read the local obituaries, if all of the "services which will be planned for a future date because of Covid" will ever actually be held.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
