Today, I watched the first three panels from a White House event focused on the importance of opening schools in the Fall. Other then the session consisting of the President and wife, I have been unable to locate video of the other sessions for sharing [summary].
Many of the sessions relied on a recent report from the Academy of American Pediatricians which argued that school plays many important functions in the lives of the young and the health risk to children and adolescents is quite small. Given the health benefits of face to face education (activity, food, identification of out of school problems such as abuse, mental health benefits related to being with peers and adults outside of the home) and the terrible educational performance of online education, it was important that the young experience face to face education.
There is a conflict between optimal academic and social/emotional learning in schools and strict adherence to current physical distancing guidelines. For example, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) recommends that schools “space seating/desks at least 6 feet apart when feasible.” In many school settings, 6 feet between students is not feasible without limiting the number of students. Evidence suggests that spacing as close as 3 feet may approach the benefits of 6 feet of space, particularly if students are wearing face coverings and are asymptomatic.
The statement on social distance is similar to the position taken on other guidelines. I would describe this position as “it will be difficult to implement many of the suggestions familiar to most aware of CDC guidelines so take these guidelines as recommendations and not requirements”. The report from the pediatricians acknowledges that it has focused on young people and not the adults (teachers, school personnel, parents, etc.).
Here is the summary of the AAP findings from the NYTimes
Secretary of Education DeVos was part of the first panel of the day and later had more direct contact with Governors.
The issue I have with the presentations made by the WH panels and the AAP is that the positions taken did not involve discussion/interaction with other experts who might have different opinions or represent different populations. I have many questions: Did the short period of learning from home most schools experienced in the Spring represent a fair test of distance education and the role of technology? Certainly, distance education is the means by which many now learn (including many programs for educators) and what about these programs is different from what students experienced in the Spring? Would more schools and educators be able to offer a more productive approach if given more training and time to prepare? My understanding of plans for implementation offers a fuzzy picture of what resources will be available and I know in some situations schools are cutting and not adding human resources I would think would be essential to deal with the new reality (health care experts in schools, mental health experts in schools, additional personnel to handle the added requirement for those who cannot or will not participate in face to face learning).
My expertise is more in considering educational issues, but I also wonder about what seem to be inconsistencies, many recently surfaced, that seem to contradict the AAP position. For example, the notion that the danger of the illness and the spread are not a significant issues for young people. I am seeing reports that the age issue recently has been moving to younger and younger individuals. For example, this from Edina, MN, as reported in the Minneapolis Star Tribune [I live near the boundary between Richfield and Edina].
So far in Edina, the city has reported 35 COVID-19 deaths and 393 cases, including 98 cases involving people 19 and younger. Edina is unusual in that children and teenagers make up its largest age block of COVID-19 cases.
https://www.startribune.com/edina-s-youth-covid-19-cases-surge-569-new-minnesota-cases/571659772/
Another recent medical issue concerns the distinction between the danger of spread via droplets vs aerosol. The concern regarding aerosolized transmission has implications for the danger of spending extended time in a confined area and the importance of air circulation which may be inadequate in many school classrooms. [Scientific American]
I simply don’t like the President, Secretary of Education, and Governors making demands that are tied to financial incentives for schools. While these are difficult decisions and the AAP did take a definitive position, there are other categories of experts with different perspectives that need to be considered. I am not yet convinced that a model that rotates students between Face to Face and online instruction does not make the most sense and would be the best solution when it comes to the health of all concerned. Political pressure can be exerted on different entities and educators make a target that is simply too convenient.
As always, I encourage your review of the sources I have summarized to reach your own conclusions.
