Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Trump Must 'Dislike' Teachers and Children...

Collapse
This topic is closed.
X
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Massena
    replied
    Originally posted by Surrey View Post

    On line education is a poor substitute for real schooling as some of the links I have posted from various child psychologists show.
    Yes, it is. But if it is run in the right way, it can be beneficial. My son is in his first year of college and is taking his courses on line. He had a hard time transitioning, but he had the self-discipline to get it done.

    And if the alternative is getting sick and possibly dying from the virus, then there is no choice in the matter.

    I got my masters on line and it was both interesting and beneficial (as well as expensive) and was well worth the effort.

    Friends of mine who are teachers are nervous about going back and afraid of getting sick-and many parents are concerned about their childrens' health.

    Our county made the decision to have two days attending regular classes and three on line. We'll see how that works out.

    I wonder if Trump, for all his demagoguery and bluster, as well as making his usual 'decrees' on the subject, is going to send his son back to school or if he even cares about the boy. According to his niece, he only cares about money and himself.

    Leave a comment:


  • Surrey
    replied
    Originally posted by Vaeltaja View Post
    Actually that is somewhat misleading too. Here all the education was possible via remote learning and remote lectures. Even for 1st through 3rd graders if their parents so choose. I know my nephew (3rd grader) had to sit by a computer/pad/phone from 8 or 9 until that days lessons were over. And then start doing homework from books/notebooks as they had brought all the books home when the schools closed. So the education continued all the time for every one. Teachers usually (but not always) made the remote lectures from schools. The main worry here was in essence the lack of social growth the school provide by having kids together. The actual material taught was the same regardless.

    If you can not arrange remote lectures and such then maybe depending on situation. However lessons should be learned from the Israeli example and also how to arrange the schools to function so that the groups would not unnecessarily mix. And also close down and quarantine in case of an positive test result. Keep in mind that i wasn't saying that the US should not open the schools at all. They should just not do so in all or nothing basis. In my opinion it should be regional (not even state level but lower) decision based purely on the status of the disease (rate of spreading etc.) in each and every location individually. Messing this up by starting it too early will only end up costing a lot more. This should absolutely not be a political issue.
    On line education is a poor substitute for real schooling as some of the links I have posted from various child psychologists show.

    Leave a comment:


  • Vaeltaja
    replied
    Originally posted by Surrey View Post
    Of course kids are going to mix to a degree even under lock down. Finland isn't Nazi Germany. But it is a valid comparison in that Swedish kids were getting an education and Finnish ones weren't. Swedish kids had no worse health outcomes than Finish ones despite being free and going to school.
    Actually that is somewhat misleading too. Here all the education was possible via remote learning and remote lectures. Even for 1st through 3rd graders if their parents so choose. I know my nephew (3rd grader) had to sit by a computer/pad/phone from 8 or 9 until that days lessons were over. And then start doing homework from books/notebooks as they had brought all the books home when the schools closed. So the education continued all the time for every one. Teachers usually (but not always) made the remote lectures from schools. The main worry here was in essence the lack of social growth the school provide by having kids together. The actual material taught was the same regardless.
    n the US the proposal is that schools are suspended indefinitely America too is not Nazi Germany so even under lock down many children will mix. So unlikely to be any health benefit in keeping schools closed and the damage to children is going to be even greater due to the longer period of no schooling.
    If you can not arrange remote lectures and such then maybe depending on situation. However lessons should be learned from the Israeli example and also how to arrange the schools to function so that the groups would not unnecessarily mix. And also close down and quarantine in case of an positive test result. Keep in mind that i wasn't saying that the US should not open the schools at all. They should just not do so in all or nothing basis. In my opinion it should be regional (not even state level but lower) decision based purely on the status of the disease (rate of spreading etc.) in each and every location individually. Messing this up by starting it too early will only end up costing a lot more. This should absolutely not be a political issue.

    Leave a comment:


  • Surrey
    replied
    Originally posted by Vaeltaja View Post
    Sure, but Finland did not enforce any kind of curfew. Fair number of kids regularly went out with other kids (was often even in national news) and hang around together. And grades pre through 3 remained open. So it is not exactly a comparison between absolute extremes. And the measures taken inside school hardly mattered when kids clustered together outside the school. Which is why i said it is interesting but i wouldn't immediately draw from it the conclusions some of here seem to be making - especially without any understanding of the context.
    Of course kids are going to mix to a degree even under lock down. Finland isn't Nazi Germany. But it is a valid comparison in that Swedish kids were getting an education and Finnish ones weren't. Swedish kids had no worse health outcomes than Finish ones despite being free and going to school. In the US the proposal is that schools are suspended indefinitely America too is not Nazi Germany so even under lock down many children will mix. So unlikely to be any health benefit in keeping schools closed and the damage to children is going to be even greater due to the longer period of no schooling.

    Leave a comment:


  • slick24
    replied
    Originally posted by Vaeltaja View Post
    we just don't yet know how many and how often.
    I will agree with that

    Leave a comment:


  • Vaeltaja
    replied
    Originally posted by slick24 View Post
    How can you see long term effects when it has not been a long enough time to see "long term" effects yet?
    Because we already know that certain kind of tissue and/or neurological damage causes long term effects regardless of the source of that damage. And we know that this infection even in mild form can cause that same damage. Unless you can prove that the same damage which causes long term effects when caused by other sources does not in fact cause long term damage when caused by this infection there is little to discuss. That being said it is possible that this infection may cause even more long term effects than those already known - so we know it causes long term effects, we just don't yet know how many and how often.

    Leave a comment:


  • slick24
    replied
    Originally posted by Vaeltaja View Post
    Except when we already can see effects which show trauma that has long term effects being caused by the disease. Or are you really saying that when we know that certain type of injury is a long term effect - and we know that the infection has caused it - that it still can not be said to cause long term damage?

    The thing we don't know is if it causes even more damage. But we already know it can cause long term effects even in mild cases.

    If you take it seriously it will certainly wont be such.
    How can you see long term effects when it has not been a long enough time to see "long term" effects yet? I guess our definitions of long term are different.


    Leave a comment:


  • Vaeltaja
    replied
    As to bad examples - especially with regards to opening schools too soon - take Israel:
    https://www.thedailybeast.com/israel...lockdown-gains

    Also this: "Can kids spread the coronavirus? 'Conclusively, without a doubt – yes,' experts say"
    https://eu.usatoday.com/story/news/h...ed/5450062002/

    So can it be done safely - yes. Can it be done safely in all conditions - no. One of the problems is that person does not need to show symptoms in order to carry and spread the virus. This includes kids. And while the kids themselves might be fine (at least if long term effects are ignored), are their parents & siblings going to be?



    And oddly enough there is this: https://edition.cnn.com/2020/07/17/p...ols/index.html - which is hopefully just pouting about this https://www.cbsnews.com/news/cdc-del...ning-guidance/ instead of more of 'ignore science'.

    Leave a comment:


  • Vaeltaja
    replied
    Originally posted by Surrey View Post
    Actually Sweden seems to have pretty much the same results among children re Covid infections as you did despite your lock down.
    Sure, but Finland did not enforce any kind of curfew. Fair number of kids regularly went out with other kids (was often even in national news) and hang around together. And grades pre through 3 remained open. So it is not exactly a comparison between absolute extremes. And the measures taken inside school hardly mattered when kids clustered together outside the school. Which is why i said it is interesting but i wouldn't immediately draw from it the conclusions some of here seem to be making - especially without any understanding of the context.

    Leave a comment:


  • Massena
    replied
    Other countries are opening schools because their count of sick and dead are demonstrably lower than the US. The US now leads the world in numbers of sick and dead from COVID-19 and the numbers are still increasing.

    Leave a comment:


  • Surrey
    replied
    Originally posted by Vaeltaja View Post
    At least here Sweden is generally considered to be a very bad example to follow.

    The school case is still open and the study between Finnish and Swedish schools requested by UNESCO is very interesting. However - even if the schoolkids could not effectively spread the disease they may still get it. Even if they have it only as mild we still don't know if they can avoid long term damage from it. Then there is the additional problem with teachers and staff who may get it. And we don't know enough to make it clear that it would be safe for a child to have this disease. If the spread of the disease is largely under control then sure, open the schools but i would not advocate doing so when it is not.

    Yet it is already known that the disease does not need to have severe symptoms to cause long term effects. Which is kind of the problem. We don't know enough. We know it is possible and that it happens but we don't know exactly why and how.

    Here schools were not opened until the situation was under control. I think that is a fairly reasonable starting point.
    Actually Sweden seems to have pretty much the same results among children re Covid infections as you did despite your lock down.

    https://www.reuters.com/article/us-h...-idUSKCN24G2IS

    “In conclusion, (the) closure or not of schools had no measurable direct impact on the number of laboratory confirmed cases in school-aged children in Finland or Sweden,”

    Leave a comment:


  • Vaeltaja
    replied
    Originally posted by G David Bock View Post
    As Science magazine reports, over 20 countries reopened schools in June, and some, like Taiwan, Nicaragua, and Sweden, never closed them to begin with. Day cares remained open for essential workers in many countries, and although there are exceptions, outbreaks have generally been rare.
    At least here Sweden is generally considered to be a very bad example to follow.

    The school case is still open and the study between Finnish and Swedish schools requested by UNESCO is very interesting. However - even if the schoolkids could not effectively spread the disease they may still get it. Even if they have it only as mild we still don't know if they can avoid long term damage from it. Then there is the additional problem with teachers and staff who may get it. And we don't know enough to make it clear that it would be safe for a child to have this disease. If the spread of the disease is largely under control then sure, open the schools but i would not advocate doing so when it is not.
    Overall, however, the data suggest that it is rare for children to develop severe symptoms if they contract the virus, and it is rare for them to spread the virus if they do get it.
    Yet it is already known that the disease does not need to have severe symptoms to cause long term effects. Which is kind of the problem. We don't know enough. We know it is possible and that it happens but we don't know exactly why and how.
    That is why many countries, particularly in Europe, have at least partially reopened schools. Here is a sample of what countries around the world are doing when it comes to reopening
    Here schools were not opened until the situation was under control. I think that is a fairly reasonable starting point.

    Leave a comment:


  • Vaeltaja
    replied
    Originally posted by slick24 View Post
    No, I am saying that until it has been long term we can't say what the long term effects are so it is stupid to argue about it.
    Except when we already can see effects which show trauma that has long term effects being caused by the disease. Or are you really saying that when we know that certain type of injury is a long term effect - and we know that the infection has caused it - that it still can not be said to cause long term damage?

    The thing we don't know is if it causes even more damage. But we already know it can cause long term effects even in mild cases.
    Now I am not saying there is no virus and it is not dangerous. I am just saying get a grip people it is not TEOTWAWKI.
    If you take it seriously it will certainly wont be such.

    Leave a comment:


  • G David Bock
    replied
    More Than 20 Countries Are Reopening Schools. The US Should Take Note.

    ...
    n March, school shutdowns around the globe caused 1.5 billion children to begin schooling from home, representing over 91% of children, UNESCO estimates.

    Here in the U.S., conversations about the state of school reopenings have hit a fever pitch as August quickly approaches. Many parents—some 71% in Education Next’s 2020 poll—feel their children learned less this spring than they would have had schools remained open.

    As Science magazine reports, over 20 countries reopened schools in June, and some, like Taiwan, Nicaragua, and Sweden, never closed them to begin with. Day cares remained open for essential workers in many countries, and although there are exceptions, outbreaks have generally been rare.

    To be sure, there have been some cases of outbreaks at schools that have reopened. As Jennifer Couzin-Frankel, Gretchen Vogel, and Meagan Weiland report in Science, more than 150 students and 25 staff members contracted the virus at a joint middle/high school in Jerusalem, and 96 students and teachers caught the virus at a New Zealand high school before that country’s lockdown went into effect.

    Additionally, two day care centers in Canada saw spikes among staff and reclosed.

    Overall, however, the data suggest that it is rare for children to develop severe symptoms if they contract the virus, and it is rare for them to spread the virus if they do get it.

    That is why many countries, particularly in Europe, have at least partially reopened schools. Here is a sample of what countries around the world are doing when it comes to reopening:
    ....
    https://www.dailysignal.com/2020/07/...U20zb29JIn0%3D

    Leave a comment:


  • G David Bock
    replied
    Originally posted by slick24 View Post

    No, I am saying that until it has been long term we can't say what the long term effects are so it is stupid to argue about it. Is that too complicated for you to understand????? You have to bring insults into a conversation like all the left does. I was stating an opinion without insulting anyone but I know you and the majority of the left can not do this. Of course some things cause long term damage but we will not know if this does until time has passed.

    This whole thing is overblown anyway...

    Makes COVID about 2/3 as bad as typical, seasonal flu. So far.

    Leave a comment:

Latest Topics

Collapse

Working...
X