You Can’t Have My Students’ Lives to Restart Your Economy

stevenmsinger #BlackLivesMatter, absenteeism, Accountability, Art, Betsy DeVos, Budget, capitalism, Charter Schools, Child Predators, Child Safety, Civil Rights, Compassion, computers, Corporate Education "Reform", Cyber Charter Schools, Data, Donald Trump, edtech, Education, Learning, Local Control, Parents, Pennsylvania, Politics, Poverty, Prejudice, privatization, Republican, school closings, School Funding, Schools, small class size, Social Justice, Special Education, Standardized Testing, student privacy, Students, Teachers, Technology, Violence Against Children, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

 

Screen Shot 2020-04-18 at 6.36.25 PM

 

It’s okay if a few children die to start up the economy.

 

That is literally the opinion being offered by media influencers and policymakers as Coronavirus social distancing efforts continue passed the 30-day mark.

 

In the midst of a global pandemic, we’ve closed down all nonessential businesses while people self quarantine at home waiting for the curve of infection to plateau and then drop off. Medical experts tell us this is the only way to ensure there are enough ventilators and hospital beds for those who get sick.

 

As it is, more than 700,000 Americans have tested positive for COVID-19 and 38,000 have died – more than the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, the September 11 terrorist attacks, Hurricane Katrina and the Oklahoma City bombing – combined. In fact, the United States has the highest number of Coronavirus deaths in the world.

 

Screen Shot 2020-04-18 at 4.11.10 PM

 

Yet there is a concerted effort by the Trump Administration and plutocrats everywhere to get business back up and running. And to do that, they need the schools to reopen so parents can return to work.

 

They literally want to reopen schools as soon as possible – even if it isn’t 100% safe.

 

And if that means students, teachers and parents die, at least their sacrifices will have been worth it.

 

“Schools are a very appetizing opportunity,” said Dr. Mehmet Oz as a guest on Fox News’ Sean Hannity show.

 
“I just saw a nice piece in [British medical journal] The Lancet arguing the opening of schools may only cost us 2 to 3%, in terms of total mortality. Any, you know, any life is a life lost, but … that might be a tradeoff some folks would consider.”

 
Dr. Oz walked back the comment after popular backlash, but I believed him the first time. Many people would find that acceptable.

 

Dr. Phil McGraw (who unlike Dr. Oz is not a licensed doctor) said the following on Fox News’ The Ingraham Angle:

 

“The fact of the matter is, the longer this lockdown goes on, the more vulnerable people get. And it’s like there’s a tipping point. There’s a point at which people start having enough problems in lockdown that it will actually create more destruction and actually more deaths across time than the actual virus will itself.”

 

He then compared coronavirus deaths to deaths from smoking, swimming pools and car crashes – which critics pointed out result from mostly voluntary behavior.

 

Once again, Dr. Phil walked back his comments after public outrage. And once again, I saw where he was coming from – because it’s clear where these celebrity talking heads are getting their information.

 

You find the same opinion tucked into many otherwise informative articles about the virus and education.

 

Education Next published a piece by Walton Family Foundation advisor and American Enterprise Institute fellow John Bailey with this precious little nugget tucked in its middle:

 

“Currently, the public health benefits of school closures and home quarantining outweigh the costs. But at what point does that equation flip? When do the economic, societal, and educational costs outweigh the public health benefits of these aggressive social distancing actions?”

 

The rich need the poor to get back to work. And they’re willing to put our lives on the line to do it.

 

What’s worse, they’re willing to put our children’s lives on the line.

 

I don’t know about you, but I’m not willing to risk my daughter’s life so that the stock market can open back up.

 

As a public school teacher, I’m not willing to bet my students lives so that the airlines and cruise industry can get back in the green.

 

Nor am I willing to gamble with my own life even if it means the NBA, NFL and MLB can start playing games and Hollywood can start premiering first run movies again.

 

There’s still so much we don’t know about COVID-19.

 

Initial reports concluded that older people were more susceptible to it, but as infections have played out worldwide, we’ve seen that 40% of patients are between 20-50 years of age. Children seem mostly asymptomatic. However, many immunologists suspect they are acting as carriers spreading the virus to the older people with whom they come into contact.

 
Children have a more difficult time with the constant hand washing and separating themselves at least 6 feet apart recommended by health experts. This is one of the justifications for closing schools in the first place. If we reopen schools too quickly, it could jumpstart another wave of infections.

 

In fact, that’s exactly what the Imperial College of London found in its own modeling study on likely U.S. and U.K. outcomes.

 

School closures can be effective to help suppress the transmission rates and flatten the curve, the report concluded, IF CONTINUED OVER FIVE MONTHS.

 

That’s a long time. But it gets worse.

 

In the absences of mass vaccinations – which may be as much as two years away – the study found the virus is likely to rebound for a second and third wave.

 

Screen Shot 2020-04-17 at 11.56.34 PM

 

So when would it be safe to reopen schools?

 

Honestly, no one really knows.

 
Former US Food and Drug Administration Commissioner Scott Gottlieb released a more optimistic answer in the “National Coronavirus Response: Roadmap to Reopening.”

 

The report maintains the need to continue social distancing including school closures until cases peak and we see sustained declines in new cases for 14 days.

 

That seems to be a fair minimum standard.

 

However, we are not there yet. The death toll continues to rise in the US and may continue to do so for some time yet.

 

Despite the science, every state has a different date in mind for when schools will reopen.

 

Since the beginning of April,a total of 21 state departments of education (including Pennsylvania’s) have decided to keep schools closed for the remainder of the academic year until at least August or September. Six states plus Washington, D.C., still have plans to reopen their schools before the end of the month.

 

Screen Shot 2020-04-17 at 11.53.43 PM

 

Beyond the question of WHEN to reopen schools is the even more complicated one of HOW or IF.

 

President and chief executive of the National Association of State Boards of Education Robert Hull said administrators across the country are asking not how – but if – schools will reopen in the fall.

 

“Everybody says we hope we return to normal,” Hull said. “It’s not going to return to normal anytime soon because the new normal is going to be different.”

 

Multiple possibilities are being considered.

 

A major factor will be how well districts can test incoming students for infection.

 

The best solution would be quick and cheap Coronavirus screenings. If we could mass produce such tests and distribute them to schools or have the results be a precondition to coming to school, things might be able to run pretty much as normal.

 

If US schools all had digital thermometers (as they do in Singapore), students temperatures could be taken before letting them in to the building. Anyone running a fever could be sent home.

 

Some policymakers are even considering spot checking students throughout the day with thermometers and using video cameras to trace the path of any students running a temperature to tell who they may have come into contact with before being identified. However, this seems pretty disruptive to me and – especially in the younger grades – might terrify students and make them conversely feel less safe in school because of the very efforts done to ensure their safety.

 

In all likelihood, policymakers see to think schools will probably have to run while engaging in some sort of social distancing. And that’s not easy. Nearly everything from the way the academic day is organized to the maturity level of most students goes against this need.

 

One thought provoking proposal is reducing class size to no more than 10 students.

 

This would also have educational benefits allowing teachers the ability to give more one-on-one instruction. However, most classes are double or triple this size now. Few school buildings are large enough to double or triple the number of classrooms needed at the same time.

 

One solution to this is that children could attend on alternate days or on a half day basis – one group in the morning, another in the afternoon. The drawback is that this would reduce the hours students are in class. Lessons would either have to be cut down to essentials or some part of assignments may have to go online.

 

This might also narrow the curriculum so that the arts, music, and other subjects would be eliminated. Gym classes would probably have to be cancelled and lunches might have to be in the classroom, itself, instead of allowing large groups of students to congregate in the cafeteria.

 

Just ensuring that students aren’t all in the hallway at the same time would be a challenge. Class dismissals might be staggered or perhaps the teachers would move from room-to-room while the students stay put.

 

Moreover, the simple act of busing students to-and-from school is likewise complicated. If students sit further apart on the bus, that means each district needs either more buses at the same time or double the time to transport students at arrival and dismissal.

 

None of this would be cheap. It could necessitate more money on transportation, support staff and teachers. In a country where education budgets haven’t yet recovered from the Great Recession of George W. Bush, reopening schools safely would require an influx of cash.

 

But without it, the economy cannot get back under way.

 

When schools closed in March, many districts switched to some kind of distance learning. Teachers put assignments on-line and even teach through Internet meeting sites like ZOOM. Continuing this in some form – for part or all of the day – is also being considered. However, it causes as many problems as it solves.

 

Parents need to be able to get back to work. Many can’t stay at home taking care of their children indefinitely. And they can’t leave their kids to their own devices while trying to learn via computer, device or app.

 

Moreover, these cyber schooling efforts come with educational drawbacks. Just about every educational expert acknowledges that learning in-person is preferable. Students with special needs are particularly at risk because many of their individual education plans (IEPs) cannot be met remotely. And even though efforts have been made to help impoverished students gain access to the necessary technology and Internet access, the problem has by no means been universally solved. Not to mention privacy concerns with student data being pirated by unscrupulous ed tech companies.

 

Another issue is high stakes standardized testing.

 

With the Coronavirus crisis, the tests were cancelled this year – and no one has really missed them.

 

If lessons have to be cut to essentials, standardized testing and the need for endless test prep should be the first things to go. In fact, students, educators, parents and college professors will tell you how useless these assessments are. They reflect basic economic inequalities and enforce them by tying education funding to the test scores.

 

Poor kids score badly and rich kids score well, so the funding becomes a reward for the privileged and a punishment for the underprivileged.

 

That’s why it’s laughable when Hull laments “issues of equity” including how to measure what students are learning and how to help those who have fallen behind.

 

Equity is a matter of funding and opportunities – not test scores. Regardless of the problems with reopening schools, we could solve a long standing issue by erasing high stakes testing from the academic map.

 

But that’s been the elephant in the classroom for a long time.

 

Economic interests have trumped academic ones for decades.

 

Will we continue to value money over children? Will we pave the post-Coronavirus future over the bodies of sick children and adults?

 

Like any crisis, COVID-19 is another opportunity to get things right.

 

Here’s hoping we have our priorities straight this time.

 

Here’s hoping schools stay closed until we’re certain reopening them won’t endanger students, teachers and the community.

 

 

Like this post?  You might want to consider becoming a Patreon subscriber. This helps me continue to keep the blog going and get on with this difficult and challenging work.

Plus you get subscriber only extras!

Just CLICK HERE.

Patreon+Circle

I’ve also written a book, “Gadfly on the Wall: A Public School Teacher Speaks Out on Racism and Reform,” now available from Garn Press. Ten percent of the proceeds go to the Badass Teachers Association. Check it out!

book-4

46 thoughts on “You Can’t Have My Students’ Lives to Restart Your Economy”

  1. One more time for those in the back!!! Do you want to know who will be the first to die if we send kids back to schools? The young children with special needs: http://www.downsyndromeprenataltesting.com/caregivers-of-individuals-with-down-syndrome-have-one-job-when-it-comes-to-covid-19/.
    Like I said in a post before, it impossible to keep young children from spreading germs. I teach a preschool special education class (an AM and PM) and I cannot count the amount of sneezes, and coughs during “healthy” times. Not to mention the mouthing and licking of objects. My paras and I do our best to clean things, but it’s impossible. Guess what else you can’t get young children (especially with various impairments) to do? Stay away from each other. The teachers would spend all they’re time “socially distancing” them that it be beyond challenging to add instruction. Also, did I mention, that our classroom is an elementary building? Things spread like wildfire. I really hope, for once, we can put the safety of the children first, as well as the educators, who already feel stretched way too thin.

    Liked by 1 person

    Reply

    • I hear you, Ashley. Loud and clear. I teach 7th and 8th graders – many with special needs. An immunologist student could get her degree with a study of my 2nd period alone! So many germs! But that’s the nature of the beast. My own daughter is little better. But when you put kids all in one place, it’s worse.

      Liked by 2 people

      Reply

  2. While children are also dying by COVID-19, the numbers are very small. But, children could be exposed, go home, and the virus kills their parents, grandparents or other family members and friends.

    The kid would probably survive as an orphan sucked into a system that is underfunded causing the rest of the kid’s childhood to be toxic. The Republicans could care less, and might even celebrate because many of those children might end up in prison for a petty crime.

    Like

    Reply

  3. I think the AMA needs to revoke Dr. Oz’s license for using his celebrity status and microphone to propose such a horrific proposal. If what he said, did not break some sort of code of ethics, I would be surprised.

    Liked by 3 people

    Reply

  4. A rather thoughtful discussion of the relevant factors in opening school. Closed schools is difficult for everyone, but it seems worth it to keep them closed for a while, to prevent death multiplication.

    People are dying along the border in U.S. companies. They are dying while trying to make a living. The employers really do not care. As you say everything about school involves mixing. I agree let us wait.

    Liked by 1 person

    Reply

  5. It’s not just about the schools and the children. The current pandemic has exposed a deeper principle at work — it has brought the corporate masters and their minions to the very point of articulating what they don’t normally dare to say —

    Concentrating wealth in the hands of the ruling classes presupposes an acceptable level of mortality in the ruled masses.

    Like

    Reply

  7. In Colorado, the Denver Public Schools are NOT going back this academic year. As far as I know NONE of the districts in the Denver metro area are going back to school this academic year even though the state has not done a state-wide blanket determination. I have a daughter in DPS who is doing distance learning in 4th grade and if she needs to in 5th grade we will do it in the fall too — and she has an IEP so we’re doing a virtual IEP meeting this week.

    Like

    Reply

  9. Personally, I’m kind of tired of nefarious motivations automatically assigned to people who disagree with you. Are there people who want schools back in session simply so Wall Street can prosper? Maybe. But there are other, actually valid, reasons to want kids back in school.

    First because, as I think we all agree, in-person learning is infinitely superior to this g-d awful “e-learning” thing we’ve got now. My favorite is online PE. I’m not blaming teachers for the awfulness of e-learning, it’s that we’re all stuck at home and that’s the best that can be done.

    Second, and much more importantly, is children’s mental health. Humans are hard-wired to be social creatures, children most of all. Children also need to move and run and engage in whole body play, particularly with other children. I personally am watching my usually brilliant, vivacious 11 year old wither away to a shell of herself and I don’t know what to do about it.

    It would be very unlikely that sending your daughter back to school would endanger *her* life. Children appear to be generally unaffected by the symptoms. Yes, there is most definitely a debate to be had about the safety of staff and faculty, as well as the transmission to other family members because children can be carriers. But we can’t lock up children forever to protect adults – that’s ming-bogglingly cruel to them and short-sighted for our own future.

    Many states, including my own, have already cancelled school for the remainder of the school year, and I have no choice but to accept that. But I cannot accept that this will continue until the disease presents no further threat. There is no cure on the horizon. A vaccine is at least 18 months away. There will always be new cases. Somehow we need to balance the risk of the disease against the equally lethal threat of the mental health crisis that is rapidly increasing.

    And let’s not pretend the economy is all about “Wall Street”. What do you say to the unemployed bartenders, hairdressers and other service providers who can’t make their rent and who have no health coverage? If either party were seriously addressing those issues, maybe we could continue this longer, but they’re not. The ACA and, worse, COBRA are absolutely not acceptable alternatives to Medicare for All. There should be a lot more than 19 Democrats arguing vociferously for recurring monthly payments to all Americans throughout the crisis.

    And anyway, many of “the poor” are indeed working. Who do you think is stocking your grocery shelves and working the Amazon warehouses and doing gig work delivering your pizza? Those workers are already struggling with facing the virus, taking care of their children, and keeping their jobs. We don’t need schools to open so that those people can work, but it would be damn helpful for those people to have somewhere for their children to be for the day while they already are working.

    The disease itself is not the only factor here. There are three separate crises going on (the disease, the economic fallout and mental/social health), and all three can kill. It’s not just a matter of lives lost, it’s a matter of which lives will be lost and how. Sure, we can prevent thousands of lives being lost to the disease by continuing the shutdown indefinitely. But what if those lives are offset by lives lost to poverty, homelessness, domestic violence, suicide, social unrest, etc.?

    Like

    Reply

    • Dienne, you need to read my article more carefully. I argue we should reopen schools when it is SAFE to do so. It is not safe now for the reasons I give there in detail. Billionaires are funding these covidiots and their terrorist demonstrations to reopen the country. When people demonstrate with guns, swastikas and anti-Semitic signs – forgive me – they can go fuck themselves. This is how I see it, this movement is another AstroTurf push by the elites to fuck us over.

      Like

      Reply

      • It’s never going to be safe. Nothing is ever safe – life doesn’t come with guarantees. If “safe” is our metric, schools will never re-open and that is unacceptable.

        Like

      • Oh come on, Dienne. That’s a Strawman argument. Nothing is ever 100% safe, but some things are safer than others. There are metrics that have been offered about when it would be safe to return to school. The “National Coronavirus Response: Roadmap to Reopening” maintains the need to continue social distancing including school closures until cases peak and we see sustained declines in new cases for 14 days. That’s at least a good minimum standard, and we’re not there yet. Having widespread testing would also be incredibly valuable – not to mention a vaccine.

        Like

      • While it is true that “life” doesn’t come with guarantees, we should also be rational enough not to walk into a burning house and sit down in the middle of the flames.

        As long as COVID-19 doesn’t have a vaccine or a drug to stop it from killing people, sending children back to school would be like forcing them to go into a burning house, and then the child carried the flames back home where they spread the fire far-and-wide killing other family members and friends.

        For instance, every year, flu vaccines are available as a safety precaution to avoid being killed by the annual flu. Many people refuse to take the vaccine and some of them die and some are infected by them and they die, too. It was their choice not to get the vaccine, but children do not get a choice. The schools must be kept closed until health experts from the WHO and CDC (without any pressure from billionaires, and the Republican Party of Trump) forcing them to tell people it is safe when it isn’t.

        Did you see the news this morning about the 7 cases of COVID-19 in Wisconsin that were traced back to voting locations on election day?

        https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2020/02/what-if-he-wont-go/606259/

        Democrats wanted the election to be mail-in-voting to avoid the risk of being infected. The GOP managed to block it and the voters that turned out had no choice. If they wanted to vote, they had to vote in person. Now, some of them might die.

        Liked by 1 person

      • I humbly suggest that the deformers and fascists that want to open the country and spread COVID-19 far and wide should not “go fuck themselves.’ That won’t achieve anything. Rather, I think they should be strapped face down on a steel-framed rack of some kind and we allow a rhinoceros to do it to them

        Like

  16. Distance “learning” is faux learning for the vast majority of students, and all California is requiring is minimal effort. So, we are basically giving students laptops to use unsupervised, give them credit for 1% (or some other ridiculously low number), then daring to call it a world class education. In addition, with much higher student-to-teacher ratios for independent study, we can expect massive teacher layoffs next year if distance “learning” continues indefinitely. So we teachers can enjoy the easier work for now, but if you are not planning on retiring next year, you’ll eventually have to piper. Don’t let administrators balance their budgets on the back of us teachers and the students we serve!

    Like

    Reply

  22. Since everyome seems to think that teachers are responsible for ensuring the economy opens, I hereby decree that we teachers get either a % or stock in the entire American economy. This will raise teacher salaries without affecting taxpayers. Our lives are not worth the measly salary that they give us and not to mention the respect for our profession is far too little. Now teachers are expected to do custodial jobs in buildings with far too many children and poor and struggling air ventalation systems. Since we do keep the rich getting richer in this capitalistic society it is time we get our fair share of the profit. Let work together to get our slice of the economic pie!

    Like

    Reply

    • Ashlee, whenever I see a comment or post that starts out with something like, “Since everyone seems to think …” I cringe.

      It is a fact that “everyone” does not think that.

      Why not do some Google research and see if you can discover what faction of the country actually does think “that teachers are responsible for ensuring the economy opens” and I suspect if anyone has studied that, you will discover that most of those people belong to the fascist, closed-minded, biased, racist voters that worship Donald Trump.

      Like

      Reply

Leave a comment

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.