3 ms·

From your own abstract: >>This suggests that keeping lower-secondary schools open had a minor impact on the overall spread of SARS-CoV-2 in society. But you'r

From your own abstract: >>This suggests that keeping lower-secondary schools open had a minor impact on the overall spread of SARS-CoV-2 in society. But you're disagreeing with that conclusion, and suggesting that the increase in COVID deaths amongst teachers, from a very small number, to a higher, but still very small number, would have caused more social harm than the harm of shutting down in-person schooling, which we know has been enormous: "30-40 percent of minority and low-income students weren’t learning during lockdowns" https://www.mckinsey.com/featured-insights/coronavirus-leading-through-the-crisis/charting-the-path-to-the-next-normal/30-to-40-percent-of-minority-and-low-income-students-werent-learning-during-lockdowns https://www.mckinsey.com/featured-insights/coronavirus-leadi...

ModernMech 5y ago
> suggesting that the increase in COVID deaths amongst teachers, from a very small number, to a higher, but still very small number, would have caused more social harm than the harm of shutting down in-person schooling First, lower school students, or as we would call them middle school students, have a much lower rate of spread compared to 18 year olds in high school. The age brackets here are a little off, but it shows the effect [0]. But more importantly, what I've said in several posts now is that you are presenting a false dichotomy, which another poster points out you in your fentanyl argument as well. The choice was not "close schools" or "keep schools open". The choice was "How do we teach and keep everyone safe". Keeping schools open in various parts of the country and failing to implement proper safety measures resulted in tragic losses of brilliant young teachers who didn't have to die. Your feelings about the magnitude of the Sweden results notwithstanding, they still show increased risk for teachers; the case of Georgia where dozens of young teachers and school staff have died in such a short time, leading to shortages and closures out of necessity rather than caution, shows how COVID can easily disrupt the entire school system, despite students not transmitting the virus. > "30-40 percent of minority and low-income students weren’t learning during lockdowns" A lot of that has to do with the inequitable distribution of resources and access to things like wifi, computers, and quiet spaces for study. We have been advocating for funding for these things for a long time, for precisely this reason. The factors that cause minorities and low income students to have trouble learning during the pandemic are the very same reasons they struggle during normal times. Remember school lunch debt is a thing. Do you think hungry students learn well in the classroom? It's really quite astounding to me that some of the loudest voices decrying school closures during lockdowns will be the ones standing in the way of increased support of the kind that would alleviate these inequities. [0] https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/70/wr/mm7003e1.htm https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/70/wr/mm7003e1.htm
- CryptoPunk 5y ago
  This is exactly the dichotomy many teachers unions forced, as they demanded not more safety measures for in-person schooling, but school closures and remote learning. >>Keeping schools open in various parts of the country and failing to implement proper safety measures resulted in tragic losses of brilliant young teachers who didn't have to die. This is entirely speculation, while you demand extreme rigor from me when I suggest a causative link behind the surge in drug overdose deaths in 2020 and the lockdown policies that massively exacerbated social isolation. >>A lot of that has to do with the inequitable distribution of resources and access to things like wifi, computers, and quiet spaces for study. We have been advocating for funding for these things for a long time, for precisely this reason. So you are admitting that teacher's unions knew that this would happen in the event of school closures. The teacher's unions' behavior was completely inexcusable and they were clearly not advocating for children.
  - ModernMech 5y ago
    > This is exactly the dichotomy many teachers unions forced, as they demanded not more safety measures for in-person schooling, but school closures and remote learning. Not in my experience, no. We've asked for all measures of all kinds, and have been met with blanket "no's" in many places. > This is entirely speculation, while you demand extreme rigor from me when I suggest a causative link behind the surge in drug overdose deaths in 2020 and the lockdown policies that massively exacerbated social isolation. I had specific people in mind when I wrote that sentence. And I'm not demanding extreme rigor, I just want to see the causative link. Still yet to see it. > The teacher's unions' behavior was completely inexcusable and they were clearly not advocating for children. First of all, the initial round of school closings was not at the behest of teacher's unions, it was an almost coordinated movement across the entire country and in many industries. Very hard to put school closings at the feet of teachers unions. Secondly, teachers unions advocate for teachers, not children. Children have their own advocates in teachers themselves, who in fact advocated the strongest for children during this time. Very strange this effort to paint teachers as somehow anti-children when they literally devote their lives to kids at great personal cost to themselves.

ModernMech 5y ago

> suggesting that the increase in COVID deaths amongst teachers, from a very small number, to a higher, but still very small number, would have caused more social harm than the harm of shutting down in-person schooling First, lower school students, or as we would call them middle school students, have a much lower rate of spread compared to 18 year olds in high school. The age brackets here are a little off, but it shows the effect [0]. But more importantly, what I've said in several posts now is that you are presenting a false dichotomy, which another poster points out you in your fentanyl argument as well. The choice was not "close schools" or "keep schools open". The choice was "How do we teach and keep everyone safe". Keeping schools open in various parts of the country and failing to implement proper safety measures resulted in tragic losses of brilliant young teachers who didn't have to die. Your feelings about the magnitude of the Sweden results notwithstanding, they still show increased risk for teachers; the case of Georgia where dozens of young teachers and school staff have died in such a short time, leading to shortages and closures out of necessity rather than caution, shows how COVID can easily disrupt the entire school system, despite students not transmitting the virus. > "30-40 percent of minority and low-income students weren’t learning during lockdowns" A lot of that has to do with the inequitable distribution of resources and access to things like wifi, computers, and quiet spaces for study. We have been advocating for funding for these things for a long time, for precisely this reason. The factors that cause minorities and low income students to have trouble learning during the pandemic are the very same reasons they struggle during normal times. Remember school lunch debt is a thing. Do you think hungry students learn well in the classroom? It's really quite astounding to me that some of the loudest voices decrying school closures during lockdowns will be the ones standing in the way of increased support of the kind that would alleviate these inequities. [0] https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/70/wr/mm7003e1.htm https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/70/wr/mm7003e1.htm

CryptoPunk 5y ago
This is exactly the dichotomy many teachers unions forced, as they demanded not more safety measures for in-person schooling, but school closures and remote learning. >>Keeping schools open in various parts of the country and failing to implement proper safety measures resulted in tragic losses of brilliant young teachers who didn't have to die. This is entirely speculation, while you demand extreme rigor from me when I suggest a causative link behind the surge in drug overdose deaths in 2020 and the lockdown policies that massively exacerbated social isolation. >>A lot of that has to do with the inequitable distribution of resources and access to things like wifi, computers, and quiet spaces for study. We have been advocating for funding for these things for a long time, for precisely this reason. So you are admitting that teacher's unions knew that this would happen in the event of school closures. The teacher's unions' behavior was completely inexcusable and they were clearly not advocating for children.
- ModernMech 5y ago
  > This is exactly the dichotomy many teachers unions forced, as they demanded not more safety measures for in-person schooling, but school closures and remote learning. Not in my experience, no. We've asked for all measures of all kinds, and have been met with blanket "no's" in many places. > This is entirely speculation, while you demand extreme rigor from me when I suggest a causative link behind the surge in drug overdose deaths in 2020 and the lockdown policies that massively exacerbated social isolation. I had specific people in mind when I wrote that sentence. And I'm not demanding extreme rigor, I just want to see the causative link. Still yet to see it. > The teacher's unions' behavior was completely inexcusable and they were clearly not advocating for children. First of all, the initial round of school closings was not at the behest of teacher's unions, it was an almost coordinated movement across the entire country and in many industries. Very hard to put school closings at the feet of teachers unions. Secondly, teachers unions advocate for teachers, not children. Children have their own advocates in teachers themselves, who in fact advocated the strongest for children during this time. Very strange this effort to paint teachers as somehow anti-children when they literally devote their lives to kids at great personal cost to themselves.