By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - General Discussion - Should schools reopen?

 

Should schools reopen?

Yes 9 13.04%
 
Yes but blended model 12 17.39%
 
No 48 69.57%
 
Total:69

No, they shouldn't.



Around the Network
NightlyPoe said:
gergroy said:

You seem to be focusing on the exceptionally young kids when defending your position.  Not every kid in school is under 10 years old and unlikely to pass the virus along....

I've said in multiple posts that middle and high schools are a tougher call.

If by multiple posts you mean one post than sure.  However, since then you have made statements like most teachers work in an environment where they are the single adult and the students are unlikely to pass along the virus. Which again ignores that one statement you made and makes the argument focusing on the very young.  Fact is, middle and high school students have always been the biggest concern since they are much larger schools with more students jammed together in classes.  People in support of opening schools seem to focus entirely on elementary aged children and ignore the big risk in secondary education.  



NightlyPoe said:
vivster said:

It sounds simplistic because it is simple. Priorities exist, for example dead kid worse than kid who had to repeat a grade.

Those are not equal options.  However, is a dead kid equal to 1,000,000 kids repeating a grade, becoming more addicted to screens, less socially capable, more stratified along racial and economic lines?  Is it equal to the increase in crime, suicide, and basic adult functionality that will come with it?

Heck, 2 1/2 months indoors and adults started burning down cities at the first excuse.  This is not healthy.

You're also forgetting that it's the teachers that are most at risk here.

Again, most teachers work in an environment where they are the single adult and the students are unlikely to pass along the virus.  The dangers can be mitigated for them as effectively as any other essential profession.

Now NightlyPoe, your focused on the drawbacks of kids not going back to school.

Time to look at the drawbacks of them doing so:
1) they will spread it to the teachers, their parents when they get home, and their grandparents, all of whom can spread it to others, outside that circle.
2) the extra spread, may lead to a virus accelerateing in spread, so much it forces the USA to go back into 2-3 months of shutdowns again.

What happends if, the US needs another 2months or more of a shutdown, due to school kids spreading the virus?

How many job losses, suicides, homeless will that bring? How many extra people will die as a result, of reopening schools? (more spread = more deaths)



Forget schools. We shouldn't have even opened up non-essential businesses when we did. All reopening did was make things worse. The moment quarantine restrictions were eased, many Americans decided that it was perfectly okay to resume life as usual (and many of us who didn't think it was okay had to deal with it, too, as we had to return to work; because of my work I come into relatively close range of hundreds of people each week, and I've been doing so for the past 2-½ months). This is a highly contagious disease, and unfortunately a large chunk of Americans have to be told to do things like not go into public unless it's necessary, or avoid large gatherings, or wear a mask. They won't do it voluntarily. And millions of them think that protesting the quarantine or refusing to wear a mask or treating the outbreak as a hoax is perfectly acceptable behavior for an adult. Millions of American "adults" never really grew up, it seems, and still behave like petulant teenagers with their "You're not the boss of me" attitude and belief that they're ten feet tall and bulletproof.

Needless to say, millions of American parents would be absolutely happy to send their kids to school, and aren't particularly concerned with the consequences, not because they don't care what happens but because many of them simply don't think the consequences are real. While children are less likely to be harmed by COVID-19, they can still spread it, and few places are as ideal for spreading diseases like a school. Countless thousands of people, the children, teachers, and the families of the students, could be exposed as the disease inevitably gets transmitted throughout schools.

Yes, kids do need a formal education environment, and it sucks that they haven't been getting that with all the schools being closed. But how many lives are we willing to sacrifice to ensure they get actual schooling as soon as possible? We've already needlessly sacrificed thousands of extra lives just so we could go to restaurants and get haircuts again, and that's in addition to the ones we lost because our so-called "leader" refused to take the outbreak seriously. How many more need to die? Are we just going to deem COVID patients as expendable? This disease has shown me that many people in this country simply do not value the lives of others, and I fear it's going to keep getting worse.



Visit http://shadowofthevoid.wordpress.com

In accordance to the VGC forum rules, §8.5, I hereby exercise my right to demand to be left alone regarding the subject of the effects of the pandemic on video game sales (i.e., "COVID bump").

In the US? No. Anyone arguing otherwise is ignoring all the various experts in order to present the idea that everything is fine when it most certainly is not fine.

We're at the highest increase in daily cases since this began. It's like people have lost their god damn minds.

https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/cases-updates/cases-in-us.html



Around the Network
NightlyPoe said:
gergroy said:

If by multiple posts you mean one post than sure.  However, since then you have made statements like most teachers work in an environment where they are the single adult and the students are unlikely to pass along the virus. Which again ignores that one statement you made and makes the argument focusing on the very young.

I made the distinction in my first two posts and have consistently made sure to focus on young children in my subsequent posts.  I have been careful with my words specifically so that I wouldn't be accused of this, and you have chosen to do so anyway.  It is very frustrating to have this done time and again on this forum.

Put bluntly, you are trying to fight with a strawman, and I ask that you not hijack my posts to do so.

If you wish to have a civilized conversation about what can be done with the older children, I welcome it.  But trying to pretend that you can twist my post to say something I did not is not the way.

I’m just going to post the part of my comment that you deleted for some reason, because it was the point of what I was saying.  (Talk about hijacking posts) Respond if you want, but the point stands for itself.

Fact is, middle and high school students have always been the biggest concern since they are much larger schools with more students jammed together in classes.  People in support of opening schools seem to focus entirely on elementary aged children and ignore the big risk in secondary education.  



gergroy said:
Pyro as Bill said:

Depends on the budget in your state but given the $12k average and the average class size shouldn't be bigger than 10-15 depending on the subject, I'd cut pupil spending by ~33% and pay you $100k with a $20-30k budget for pencils n shit while saving the taxpayer ~$50k.

Haha, that would be great!  Wouldn’t happen in Utah though.  We are in last place in per pupil spending by a long ways.  I have never had a class of less than 30 students.  This is actually the first year in a long time that all my classes aren’t over 40 and that’s because they just built a new school... I do make about 65k though.

For a profession that is supposed to educate, why has no teacher or teaching union been able to point out the savings/benefits using simple multiplication/division?

- $7000 pupil spending even in Utah in 2016. (That's the UK average in £). $20,000 in New York which is more than the cost of some excellent private schools in the UK.

30 kids x $7000 = $210,000

15 kids x $7000 = $105,000



Nov 2016 - NES outsells PS1 (JP)

Don't Play Stationary 4 ever. Switch!

Pyro as Bill said:
gergroy said:

Haha, that would be great!  Wouldn’t happen in Utah though.  We are in last place in per pupil spending by a long ways.  I have never had a class of less than 30 students.  This is actually the first year in a long time that all my classes aren’t over 40 and that’s because they just built a new school... I do make about 65k though.

For a profession that is supposed to educate, why has no teacher or teaching union been able to point out the savings/benefits using simple multiplication/division?

- $7000 pupil spending even in Utah in 2016. (That's the UK average in £). $20,000 in New York which is more than the cost of some excellent private schools in the UK.

30 kids x $7000 = $210,000

15 kids x $7000 = $105,000

Well... unfortunately there is quite a bit more cost associated with education than just paying the teachers... heck, my school spent over $50,000 on just paper last year... and that’s with every student having a chromebook...

You do have to pay for the building, support staff, supplies, lunches, district staff, technology, etc.  There is a lot more that needs to be paid for besides the teacher, education isn’t cheap...



gergroy said:
Pyro as Bill said:

For a profession that is supposed to educate, why has no teacher or teaching union been able to point out the savings/benefits using simple multiplication/division?

- $7000 pupil spending even in Utah in 2016. (That's the UK average in £). $20,000 in New York which is more than the cost of some excellent private schools in the UK.

30 kids x $7000 = $210,000

15 kids x $7000 = $105,000

Well... unfortunately there is quite a bit more cost associated with education than just paying the teachers... heck, my school spent over $50,000 on just paper last year... and that’s with every student having a chromebook...

You do have to pay for the building, support staff, supplies, lunches, district staff, technology, etc.  There is a lot more that needs to be paid for besides the teacher, education isn’t cheap...

Whoever came up with the idea of putting 30 children in a room stuck behind a desk and expect them to become educated deserves to be shot for the damage and cost they've done to society.

$50k on paper. So divide $50k by the number of pupils (1000-10000) and give them a $5-$50 voucher to buy their own paper.

It's almost as though a contract with the public sector will set a company up for life and make enough profit to dish out the occasional bribe.



Nov 2016 - NES outsells PS1 (JP)

Don't Play Stationary 4 ever. Switch!

NightlyPoe said:
gergroy said:

I’m just going to post the part of my comment that you deleted for some reason, because it was the point of what I was saying.  (Talk about hijacking posts) Respond if you want, but the point stands for itself.

Fact is, middle and high school students have always been the biggest concern since they are much larger schools with more students jammed together in classes.  People in support of opening schools seem to focus entirely on elementary aged children and ignore the big risk in secondary education.  

Uh, uh.  No.  No.  No.  No.  No.

You do not get to twist my words around after I carefully made sure not to say something and then tell me that I'm the one hijacking your post.  I deleted the section because your behavior was so bad that it needed to immediately be called out.

Fact is, middle and high school students have always been the biggest concern since they are much larger schools with more students jammed together in classes.

I agree that they're the bigger concerns.

 People in support of opening schools seem to focus entirely on elementary aged children and ignore the big risk in secondary education.  

And, again, you're putting words in my mouth.  So, ignore.

Dude, really?  Look at your posts again.  You are clearly an intelligent person, but you were not so careful as you think you were.  Look at how you phrased things throughout the thread.  Your careful words are the very young, what does that mean?  Very young can describe lots of ages.  

Now, if you were arguing for elementary schools to be opened and not middle and high schools, don’t you think it would be more clear to explicitly say that?  Except you didn’t, you said that was another conversation at one point. Then what did you do about that subject, IGNORED it.  I’m not putting word in your mouth as much as explicitly describing what you are doing.  

Whatever your intentions, I think we are getting to a point where we are attacking each other and not talking about the subject, so let’s talk about the subject.  What do you think should be done with middle and high schools?