K-12 Schools & COVID

[Its DJOver]

Our District's face to face plan is a joke.  There are so many 'where feasible' statements and so many things not addressed.  And I question how they can enact some of the stuff in their plan from a financial and staffing perspective.   It remains to be seen if they start with any in person classes but my kids will be starting out with a virtual option.

This is along the same lines as my thought process.  Some of the more gung-ho about face to face posters have said that as long as there is a plan in place, kids should go back.  It's not that simple, the plan has to be both effective and feasible.  Now granted I'm not going around analyzing every plan that I can get my hands on, but I have yet to see one that has what I would consider adequate procedures regarding the protocols for what students will do when one or multiple teachers tests positive.

[pacearrow02]

This is along the same lines as my thought process.  Some of the more gung-ho about face to face posters have said that as long as there is a plan in place, kids should go back.  It's not that simple, the plan has to be both effective and feasible.  Now granted I'm not going around analyzing every plan that I can get my hands on, but I have yet to see one that has what I would consider adequate procedures regarding the protocols for what students will do when one or multiple teachers tests positive.

Our districts plan is to isolate, quarantine that individual for 14 days and then contact trace.

What else can really be done?

[Its DJOver]

Our districts plan is to isolate, quarantine that individual for 14 days and then contact trace.

What else can really be done?

I get the sense that you didn't really read my entire post, let me highlight the important part.

Now granted I'm not going around analyzing every plan that I can get my hands on, but I have yet to see one that has what I would consider adequate procedures regarding the protocols for what students will do when one or multiple teachers tests positive.

Isolating the teacher is fine and all, although I think it is unrealistically optimistic to think that all teachers that tests positive would be in a position to resume teaching in 14 days.  The problem is what to do with their students. 

Considering there's already a shortage of substitute teachers, and I would bet a significant number of the one's remaining will be choosing to not teach, since many are just retired teachers that would be in a higher risk age group, and just combining classes to give the load to another teacher is the opposite of what should be done.  I've really only seen vague answers to how this will be tackled, and just hoping that the issue doesn't arise is terribly naive, but not surprising.

[The Lens]

Our Catholic grade school has said that teachers that test positive will be given the opportunity virtually teach from home (if they're asymptomatic and up to the task).  We're close with a number of teachers at the school and it is remarkable how determined the teachers are to get back in the building and make this work.  A tremendous amount of positive energy matched with an incredible amount of precaution and risk mitigation. 

[GooooMarquette]

Our Catholic grade school has said that teachers that test positive will be given the opportunity virtually teach from home (if they're asymptomatic and up to the task).  We're close with a number of teachers at the school and it is remarkable how determined the teachers are to get back in the building and make this work.  A tremendous amount of positive energy matched with an incredible amount of precaution and risk mitigation.

Does this also apply if a student tests positive and the teacher was potentially exposed?

If so, it would potentially mitigate the teacher shortage at your school. However, it could also cause a lot of switching back and forth between in-person and online learning - essentially flip-flopping back and forth whenever the teacher or a student in the class tests positive. As much as teachers might be motivated to do that, I wonder if it might be more disruptive to education than just continuous online learning.

Not claiming it would be, but I have to wonder.

[The Lens]

Does this also apply if a student tests positive and the teacher was potentially exposed?

If so, it would potentially mitigate the teacher shortage at your school. However, it could also cause a lot of switching back and forth between in-person and online learning - essentially flip-flopping back and forth whenever the teacher or a student in the class tests positive. As much as teachers might be motivated to do that, I wonder if it might be more disruptive to education than just continuous online learning.

Not claiming it would be, but I have to wonder.

In that case they are initially saying they will work with our local health department to determine via exposure level if the student's cohort or entire class needs to be put into Q, at which point some or all will be taught virtually.  Each classroom is being set up with a stream for virtual learning for kids who are out.   

This may all fall apart after a few weeks but the school admin, teachers and parents have worked together to do everything possible to get back in person safely.  Masks, distance, regular hand sanitizing, no changing classrooms etc. are all being done.   

[GooooMarquette]

In that case they are initially saying they will work with our local health department to determine via exposure level if the student's cohort or entire class needs to be put into Q, at which point some or all will be taught virtually.  Each classroom is being set up with a stream for virtual learning for kids who are out.   

This may all fall apart after a few weeks but the school admin, teachers and parents have worked together to do everything possible to get back in person safely.  Masks, distance, regular hand sanitizing, no changing classrooms etc. are all being done. 

Should be interesting to watch. Glad to see they have a plan for this and are taking all the in-school precautions mentioned in your last sentence.

The 'mask optional' schools (most I have read about are in the South) are just disasters waiting to happen.

[The Sultan]

Does this also apply if a student tests positive and the teacher was potentially exposed?

If so, it would potentially mitigate the teacher shortage at your school. However, it could also cause a lot of switching back and forth between in-person and online learning - essentially flip-flopping back and forth whenever the teacher or a student in the class tests positive. As much as teachers might be motivated to do that, I wonder if it might be more disruptive to education than just continuous online learning.

Not claiming it would be, but I have to wonder.

The general rule is you have to come in close contact with someone with Covid (within six feet for 15 minutes) for someone to need to quarantine. 

[forgetful]

In that case they are initially saying they will work with our local health department to determine via exposure level if the student's cohort or entire class needs to be put into Q, at which point some or all will be taught virtually.  Each classroom is being set up with a stream for virtual learning for kids who are out.   

This may all fall apart after a few weeks but the school admin, teachers and parents have worked together to do everything possible to get back in person safely.  Masks, distance, regular hand sanitizing, no changing classrooms etc. are all being done.   

I think the uncertainty of it all makes things worse for the average family. If you know you have to plan for virtual learning for a semester/year, you can start to make concrete plans. But sudden 14-day quarantines, of which there could be numerous, creates an inability to plan, and sudden stress/pressure on family planning situations.

The sudden stress/pressure will create more general problems in terms of child care, but also stress the family system, potentially leading to more abuse and issues.

Not to mention the cost that was incurred to set up the hybrid learning system.

I think there was sufficient data to indicate that the best plan was virtual only.

[injuryBug]

Our Catholic grade school has said that teachers that test positive will be given the opportunity virtually teach from home (if they're asymptomatic and up to the task).  We're close with a number of teachers at the school and it is remarkable how determined the teachers are to get back in the building and make this work.  A tremendous amount of positive energy matched with an incredible amount of precaution and risk mitigation.

Same here in my public school.  Starting out face to face with options to teach virtually and learn virtually if sick or uncomfortable with being face to face.  Must commit to virtual learning for a quarter though.  also changing the schedules at the HS to go to blocks to reduce the amount of time in crowded spaces.

Hopefully the school installed the lights that kill viruses over the summer

[Galway Eagle]

Same here in my public school.  Starting out face to face with options to teach virtually and learn virtually if sick or uncomfortable with being face to face.  Must commit to virtual learning for a quarter though.  also changing the schedules at the HS to go to blocks to reduce the amount of time in crowded spaces.

Hopefully the school installed the lights that kill viruses over the summer

That's a clever idea I hadn't even considered, do that and get the HEPPA air filters, and repaint using anti bacterial paint. Then you're looking at some potential for going back.

[forgetful]

Same here in my public school.  Starting out face to face with options to teach virtually and learn virtually if sick or uncomfortable with being face to face.  Must commit to virtual learning for a quarter though.  also changing the schedules at the HS to go to blocks to reduce the amount of time in crowded spaces.

Hopefully the school installed the lights that kill viruses over the summer

Installing UV-lights to disinfect rooms could be quite costly. You would need some rewiring for new lighting (not cheap especially in older building), but for safety reasons you'd need to install multiple fail-safe mechanisms, e.g. motion sensors that inactivate the UV-lighting, warning lighting outside rooms, I'd actually argue for a search-light mechanism. Where you have to hit one button to activate the switch, then on a 30-second delay (to search the room), a second switch at the door to turn it on.

The door would also need to have an automated lock system to ensure that once the system is on, one cannot re-enter the room without disabling the system.

Bottom line, although it would help, the safety requirements would be cost-prohibitive.

[Hards Alumni]

Honestly, if I was superintendent of a school district, I'd say we are doing virtual learning until October, and then we will reevaluate.  By October, we should see what works and what doesn't. 

[GooooMarquette]

The general rule is you have to come in close contact with someone with Covid (within six feet for 15 minutes) for someone to need to quarantine.

If a student tests positive and they are with the same teacher for an entire school day, it would seem quite likely that the teacher (and many of the other students) would meet those criteria every time. In fact, it would be hard to believe they wouldn't.

[buckchuckler]

If a student tests positive and they are with the same teacher for an entire school day, it would seem quite likely that the teacher (and many of the other students) would meet those criteria every time. In fact, it would be hard to believe they wouldn't.

If masks are being worn, it doesn't count as an exposure.  At least that is what I have been led to believe, in a technical sense. 

[The Sultan]

If a student tests positive and they are with the same teacher for an entire school day, it would seem quite likely that the teacher (and many of the other students) would meet those criteria every time. In fact, it would be hard to believe they wouldn't.

It depends.  If they are a teacher that is standing in front of the class (more likley a high school teacher), and everyone else is masked and distanced properly, then no, they wouldn't need to quarantine.

[Frenns Liquor Depot]

It depends.  If they are a teacher that is standing in front of the class (more likley a high school teacher), and everyone else is masked and distanced properly, then no, they wouldn't need to quarantine.

I think you are being a little linear.  I know the guidance is 6 ft, etc, but from what i read it will greatly depends on airflow, size of room and a variety of other factors and isnt really foolproof.  I think schools will have to figure this out, but getting out the measuring tape probably isn't going to cut it.

Personally, I would pursue the cheap/lower sensitivity daily rapid test.  It would cut down complexity and would eliminate ambiguity.

[The Sultan]

I think you are being a little linear.  I know the guidance is 6 ft, etc, but from what i read it will greatly depends on airflow, size of room and a variety of other factors and isnt really foolproof.  I think schools will have to figure this out, but getting out the measuring tape probably isn't going to cut it.

Personally, I would pursue the cheap/lower sensitivity daily rapid test.  It would cut down complexity and would eliminate ambiguity.

Do you really think local school districts are going to measure the airflow of each classroom and pay for daily testing?

I have been working on these types of issues for weeks now on our campus.  I am definitely NOT saying that everyone else is the classroom is safe, but just that you shouldn't have to automatically quarantine a teacher because one student in the class tests positive.  No college or school district is going to operate by that standard because it would quickly become impossible.

Look, every school district and college campus is going to have positives.  It is impossible to completely keep it out.  The issue is how do we properly balance risk factors and mitigate spread.

[Frenns Liquor Depot]

Do you really think local school districts are going to measure the airflow of each classroom and pay for daily testing?

I have been working on these types of issues for weeks now on our campus.  I am definitely NOT saying that everyone else is the classroom is safe, but just that you shouldn't have to automatically quarantine a teacher because one student in the class tests positive.  No college or school district is going to operate by that standard because it would quickly become impossible.

Look, every school district and college campus is going to have positives.  It is impossible to completely keep it out.  The issue is how do we properly balance risk factors and mitigate spread.

No I don't expect them to measure the airflow.  But it's not shocking that schools would err on the side of caution.  Realistically you would find out pretty quick if erring on the side of 6' works or doesn't.  Probably within a week and if it went a detrimental way it would not be good in my opinion. 

[GooooMarquette]

It depends.  If they are a teacher that is standing in front of the class (more likley a high school teacher), and everyone else is masked and distanced properly, then no, they wouldn't need to quarantine.

If a teacher is just standing in the front of the class lecturing, it hardly seems worth the risk of sending kids back to school. After all, isn't the lack of direct interaction one of the biggest objections to the quality of online classes? Is seeing a person at a distance really all that much better than watching the same person on a screen?

ETA: And what about younger kids? It is hardly realistic to expect elementary and maybe even middle school kids to sit in place while a teacher lectures at a distance. In those cases, if there is any real learning happening at all, it would seem to require closer interaction...and perhaps a rebuttable presumption that everyone was within 6 feet of the infected person.

[The Sultan]

If a teacher is just standing in the front of the class lecturing, it hardly seems worth the risk of sending kids back to school. After all, isn't the lack of direct interaction one of the biggest objections to the quality of online classes? Is seeing a person at a distance really all that much better than watching the same person on a screen?

ETA: And what about younger kids? It is hardly realistic to expect elementary and maybe even middle school kids to sit in place while a teacher lectures at a distance. In those cases, if there is any real learning happening at all, it would seem to require closer interaction...and perhaps a rebuttable presumption that everyone was within 6 feet of the infected person.

I don't recall my teachers in middle or high school doing much more than standing in the front of the class.  They certainly weren't regularly less than six feet from me.  And I do think that is still a better learning environment than virtual.

Elementary is different I grant you that.

[Spotcheck Billy]

.

[GooooMarquette]

I don't recall my teachers in middle or high school doing much more than standing in the front of the class.  They certainly weren't regularly less than six feet from me.  And I do think that is still a better learning environment than virtual.

Elementary is different I grant you that.

For discussion purposes, let's assume this is all true.

Most of what I have seen seems focused on getting elementary school kids back sooner and more comprehensively, and maybe going more slowly (or alternate days) with the older kids. This is certainly the case in these places I found in a random Google search:

https://www.hngnews.com/cambridge_deerfield/article_8955caa6-8f05-5029-a9d8-4f5499ebe1ad.html

https://www.mycentraljersey.com/story/news/education/2020/08/05/somerville-schools-reopening-plan-includes-5-days-person-some/5572160002/

https://www.wausaudailyherald.com/story/news/2020/08/04/d-c-everest-schools-opening-district-eyes-mix-person-virtual-classes-amid-covid-19-pandemic/3289658001/

But if younger kids require closer contact while older kids can learn in-school from teachers at a distance, are those school districts (and many others) getting it backwards?

[MUBurrow]

But if younger kids require closer contact while older kids can learn in-school from teachers at a distance, are those school districts (and many others) getting it backwards?

From an infection rate standpoint, almost certainly.  But its really about childcare issues.  If the younger kids are home, parents aren't working.

[mu_hilltopper]

I stayed at a Holiday Inn Express and I've spent a good amount of time researching air filtration and UV lights and their potential to help with COVID.

Short Answer: Maybe air filters and UVC helps.  Might as well.

The big question is about the virus and is it in the air for a few seconds then drop to the floor, or does dwell and is therefore "airborne."   Some say yes, some say no.

The whole "it drops to the floor" concept is why we have the 6 foot distancing rule.  In theory, someone sprays out the virus as they speak, it drops to the ground in 6 feet, problem solved.

If it instead floats around, then air filters can help.  HEPA filters go down to .01 micron, and COVID is .125, so yay for that.   

Most HVACs have MERV 8-11-14 filters.  Guess what .. MERV 14 only goes down to .3, so .. COVID could slip right through.  I don't think HEPA filters are common in HVAC instals.

Enter UV-C lighting.  It's really not that expensive.  For $100 a consumer can attach one to their HVAC -- I've done this personally.   It's a bit of a mystery if the air molecules spend enough time in the duct where the UV-C bulb is to destroy the virus, but for $100 I'll gamble on that.

Industrial air handlers can have large, multi-bulb UVC bulbs, 3 feet long that COVID would get zapped.   Again, not super expensive. 

Interestingly, it appears the best option would be "Upper Room UVC" .. basically, you mount a UVC lightbox on each wall, high above the room.  The box has slats, so the UVC rays only go straight across the top of the room.   You can flip them on all day long, with people below, and it creates a zone of virus death near the top of the room.   (* Certain ceiling paints and other obstacles can be too reflective and cause eye strain for below, so .. gotta watch for that.)

This is used in Tuberculosis clinic waiting rooms in countries TB is prevalent.   The UVC Upper Room lightboxes are not that expensive and are easily retro-fitted onto walls.

In conclusion .. that's what I'd be installing in classrooms.  And Arby's.