Arthur Goldstein, a veteran New York City high school teacher, warns that New York City public schoools cannot open unless they are safe for students and staff. He wrote an open letter to staff at his school. The signs and portents of a strike by the city’s United Federation of Teachers are looming in the background.
He writes, in part,
Every time I read someone advocating opening buildings, they have a proviso. They say of course, if it doesn’t work out, we’ll go back to remote learning. In fact there are a lot of places where it didn’t work out, and they did just that. There’s Israel, South Korea, multiple schools in the south and southwest, and universities that saw immediate rises in infection levels, while starting below Mayor de Blasio’s much ballyhooed 3% positive level (so much for that). Chapel Hill closed in one week.
There’s a real cost to these openings, and that cost is the health of those who attend. I know some of you who’ve been very sick. I know some of you who’ve lost family members. I’ve had family members sick, and I lost a friend.
The whole country is looking to us as the only major city that can possibly open school buildings. UFT has looked at this, and decided that if we are to open, the only way to do it is safely. We’ve therefore consulted with medical experts, some of whom you can see at Mulgrew’s press conference, and concluded the only way to deal with the virus was to actively test for it and trace it.
We don’t want a single educator or student to get sick. We don’t want any students or employees bringing COVID home to their families. The UFT demands for testing were created in consultation with medical experts. They are beyond reasonable; they are visionary. We’ve looked at the failures and determined ways to preclude them. Our testing demands are based on science. The mayor’s opposition is based on hiding his head in the sand and hoping for the best.
Here is a checklist of what UFT will be looking at as we visit every building in the city. UFT also demands a Covid Building Response Team to create protocols for how students will move when entering and leaving school, and also to map out responses to issues that may occur. Finally, to ensure safety, we demand that everyone entering the school building be tested for the virus. We demand random testing to ensure we stay safe.
UFT will not allow its members or the students we serve to be veritable canaries in a coal mine. Dr. Fauci can talk about how we’re part of a great experiment, but we refuse to be guinea pigs. We refuse to make guinea pigs of our families, our students, or their families. If Mayor de Blasio refuses to make schools safe, we will refuse to work.
To be extra clear, is Goldstein saying that NYC schools should not reopen until the virus is totally eradicated? If so, schools will need to be closed for all of this calendar year, and may need to be closed for years after that. Maybe that’s the world we live in now—I’ve sort of lost track of the ball at this point.
We haven’t even eradicated the bubonic plague. If eradication is the goal, schools will need to be closed permanently.
That’s not at all what I’m saying. What I’m saying is we need a rigorous testing program, as proposed by UFT. I think that’s clear in the excerpt.
What is the UFT testing program? My (admittedly vague) recollection is something like: all students and staff must be tested within 7 days of reopening, and tested again within 7 days after reopening. Please correct me if I’m wrong about that. If I’m not wrong, wouldn’t this require 700,000 or so coronavirus and antibody tests to be administered and have results delivered within a 7 day period, and then again in the next 7 day period? If so, that seems extremely ambitious, to put it lightly.
Flerp,
Given the expected very low positive rate, I would expect them to do pooled testing to save on reagent. It would also be prudent not to test everyone. My University, on the advice of the folks at our medical and public health schools, is doing both. Social distancing, mask wearing, and good hand hygiene will prevent infection. We need not use huge numbers of tests on asymptomatic people to learn if the infection rate is changing. A smallish random sample will be enough.
UFT wants everyone entering a school to be tested at first, and then random testing thereafter. Details are here. https://www.uft.org/news/news-stories/uft-threatens-actions-if-unsafe-school-buildings-open
Thanks. 750,000 tests within 10 days prior to school start, with results provided within that 10 day window? There is absolutely no chance the city could coordinate that. This demand is effectively a demand to shut down completely. Personally, I’m not opposed to that because I think hybrid learning will be a disaster and (for now at least) I have the means to handle child care and other supplemental help. But why did it take the UFT until August to propose this? Mulgrew has had a seat at the table since the beginning, since April.
I know of no other school district in NY State that has that requirement. There is no CDC guidance that requires it. Even hospitals do not require visitors to test before entering… only patients. And even patients are allowed in pending test results.
Until we have a fighting chance against this disease, an available and effective vaccine, we are playing Russian Roulette with our health, and the health of our families. Right now just going to the store is a risky proposition…School aside. So how do we rationalize a reckless reopening?
poetic question: How do we rationalize reckless re-openings 🙂
We. Do. Not
First time post here, LaWanda? Good one, & hope to see more of your comments in the future.
Aside: what is this insistence on temperature-taking such as the very act making people “safe?” One of the conundrums of covid (aside from its being airborne, which is why it’s so rampant) is that so many people may have it, yet are asymptomatic. So, then, what does temperature-taking accomplish, if person has covid, but would not have a fever, because he/she/they is asymptomatic?!
I won’t speak for Arthur Goldstein but I’ve been reading his thoughtful analysis and commentary on this problem and I doubt he is saying we need to wait until we eradicate this virus. First, we won’t eradicate this virus even with a all the measures we have taken and will take including a mass vaccination. We can’t eradicate, wipe our this virus we will have to deal with it. How we deaql with it is a matter of life and death. How we have dealt with it in NY state and in NYC has cost us dearly; we have lost a greater percentage of our population than anyplace on earth. This loss is not primarily due to demographics or density or poverty or comorbidity but to poor and often disastrous decisions by our governments. We can’t put faith in decision makers who won’t even acknowledge how wrong they were and accept that they are responsible for the consequences of their actions.
No, we can’t re-open schools in NY. Not yet. Of course we will open schools when it is safe to do so. The UFT has taken a position we should all support as we work to solve this problem and get back to normal. But getting back to normal may take years not weeks or months. It will be expensive to implement a model until we can transition back to opening buildings. It will be difficult and far from what we all want, what students need and deserve. But we simply can’t provide education services as we did before Corona Virus. Even if we had the money and the people to do it we could not do it. But we must work to make the education we can provide the best we can provide given the environment we live in and are likely to live in for months, perhaps years.
Opening schools is the easy and foolish strategy. We need the difficult and smart strategy. Teachers, advised by scientists and health care professionals must lead this new difficult work not politicians. We’ve seen what Cuomo and De Blasio can do with a virus emergency. And, we’ve seen what teachers can do. I think we should listen to the teachers this time.
Its one thing to say schools should not open in places like Iowa, where positivity rates are at 15% or higher. But in NYC where in much of the city the positivity rate is below 1% – and in no zip code is it above 3% – schools have to try to re-open. (With social distancing, masking, neither of which were done in Israel.) Will there be an occasional outbreak? yes probably, but they will be contained. And if there is a second wave, the schools will go all-remote. There are no good options, but if the virus stays low, and New Yorkers are out and about at restaurants and museums, and the only institution that stays closed are the public schools, then support for public schools will fall apart. I would like to send my son back to his public School, at least part-time. Teachers who need medical exemptions should get them. But the level of fear is disproportionate and remote learning does not work for under-10. There is no 100% effective vaccine, we will never be rid of some risk of COVID. Teachers have to ask themselves what the future of their profession will be if we give up on in-person education.
The NYC problem is the failure of the city and state to provide the resources for a safe reopening. NYC still has many schools without a school nurse and is advertising for nurses ($50 an hour). Social distancing is impossible without smaller classes and additional teachers.
For the record, every time a custodial worker leaves our school there is no replacement. Not for years. Many of us don’t remember seeing our schools clean. It’s a large leap of faith to imagine they’ll be sanitized daily, let alone ever, or that adequate ventilation will be in place. There will be many smaller classes. However, if a teacher has 12 students, someone has to teach the other 22 remotely. Chancellor Carranza says he will disperse Tweed employees to teach. Tweed employees could not cover one large school, let alone 1800 of varying sizes. We are all still waiting for Mayor de Blasio to tell us where the magical co-teachers are coming from.
Maybe teachers are reticent to go back into school buildings because they know what goes on in there in the best of times.
I heard Carranza yesterday on CBS Sunday Morning talking about all the “stakeholders” he’s been consulting on reopening schools. Teachers were conspicuously absent from his list.
I guarantee that the UFT will agree that the city has met its obligation to provide a safe environment. Oh wait, I forgot that UFT dues can be withheld by members if they choose to leave the union so maybe the strike threat is real!!!
Good afternoon Diane and everyone,
Massachusetts is requiring all children above 6 months old to get a flu vaccine by December if they will be attending public schools or day cares. In my husband’s school students will be staying in 1 classroom for most of the day while teachers move from room to room. So, think of it this way. Let’s say there are 12 kids (more like 15, but let’s lowball it) to a room. He has 5 classes a day. That’s seeing 60 people per day in a room where some kids may be wearing masks and some won’t. His school is allowing students to remove masks during instruction. This doesn’t count all the other people he will come in contact with during the day. It also doesn’t take into account that different students will be in school the next day. So, that’s 120 different students he will have to see every 2 days). Would you sit in a room with 15 strangers (some who might not be wearing masks or ALL who might not wear masks) for hours every day? HIs superintendent also told teachers that they should NOT have the “mindset” that every student is a carrier of the virus. WHAT? My “mindset” is that everyone has the virus and so do I. Needless to say, I wasn’t all that happy.
Just to be clear here,
NYC is NOT simply “re-opening schools”. As far as I can tell, the NYC idea is not like Israel or South Korea because all parents who prefer that their child attend school remotely have absolute freedom to do that — no questions asked.
I wish there was a way to tone down some of the rhetoric on both sides. Remember, nothing is being forced on students, period. Given how low virus rates are, there is some sense in giving parents the option of sending their kids to school. But there is absolutely no pressure on a parent not to choose remote, except that they have to commit to it for a given length of time (more about that later).
Does anyone else recognize that the problem has a Catch-22 built into it?
The more that the DOE presents an ideal plan for in-person learning, the more families will say “I’ll send my kid to in-person learning”. But the more families who choose in-person learning, the more impossible it is to make that in-person work!
So the best way to make in-person workable for the parents who are stuck in a situation where their kids cannot learn remotely is to present the experience in a way that doesn’t make it seem so appealing that the vast majority of parents will choose in-person! Because the more parents who choose in-person, the worse the experience will be. But the better in-person learning seems, the more parents will choose it and make it worse.
There is a lot of sense to the DOE making parents commit to remote and not be able to switch to in-person for a given period of time (I think it is 9 weeks). Because that allows the DOE to know for a fact what the MAXIMUM number of students will be for that time in-person and plan accordingly, knowing that number will likely go down, but also knowing that number will never increase for that period.
I agree with everyone about the serious problems with the DOE plan. But there are also serious problems with the other plans, too.
We are talking about a school system where over 70% of the students are economically disadvantaged, and a significant number of them have parents who don’t speak English. Just saying “get them all tested” — are we talking about testing over one million students every 2 or 3 weeks? — is also incomprehensible.
I haven’t seen any plan that really makes sense. I have seen plans that make sense for my circumstances, and I would perfectly fine with them, but I can also see that if I were an essential worker or had a myriad of other reasons why having schools open for live education was important, it would be very selfish of me to simply be lobbying for what works for my kid without thinking about what compromises I should be making to have a plan that works better (but is far from perfect) for the most vulnerable at-risk kids.
From a parents’ perspective, as long as we can easily choose remote learning, my priorities are NOT to have the best remote learning possible. I know that sounds odd, but I would much rather have a program that accommodates the families who can’t choose remote, and I would sacrifice the “best remote possible” so that their kids could get more of what they need. I support a plan that tries to offer the best remote learning possible, but where the priority is how to address the education needs of students who need it most. If more affluent kids whose parents chose remote have a lesser experience so those kids get more, it is worth it (in my opinion). I’d love for everyone to have everything, but that just isn’t possible.
I think it would be easy to figure this out if NYC was just a small school system with 500 students per grade. But there is no way with over one million student to deal with that there aren’t going to be trade offs.
I have enormous respect and sympathy for teachers who are so essential and whose voice must be heard.
Hello NYC public school parent,
So funny you should mention this! I was just wondering how many parents/kids are going to switch from in-person learning to remote learning because the limitations and restrictions at schools are NOT going to be fun at all for students and teachers!!! My conundrum at the moment is HOW do I make learning French fun for 7th graders who are new to French when we CANNOT sing, play games, move around the classroom and 80% of activities I use in class are out the window!?!? <<<scream!!>>>>
While I read this post, I kept imagining images of Donald Trump as the self-proclaimed MAD Scientist expressing on children, parents, and teachers to find a method to defeat COVID-19.
First, he forces them to take hydroxychloroquine. When that insane experiment fails, he blames the real scientists for his failure.
“Trump’s magic drug hydroxychloroquine may be killing coronavirus patients across the globe: Study”
https://www.wionews.com/world/trumps-magic-drug-hydroxychloroquine-may-be-killing-coronavirus-patients-across-the-globe-study-300863
After Trump torches the real scientists for his first insane attempt to deal with the virus that he sees as part of a plot by his enemies, he forces children, parents, and teachers to become lab rats and drink bleach.
When the bleach fails and kills more of his lab rats, he refuses to admit he is the responsible monster for their deaths and calls for a boycott of companies that make bleach saying that they poisoned the bleach to defeat him.
Then he forces the next crop of children, parents, and teacher lab rats to swallow a battery-powered UV light small enough to pass through the body as it glows on all of our inner surfaces from the mouth through the anus.
“Are Ultraviolet Sanitizing Lights Safe for Humans?”
Research has found that UVC degrades genetic material like DNA so severely, microbes or viruses hit by the rays can’t multiply. “It doesn’t kill the virus — it renders it unable to reproduce,” says Jim Bolton, an environmental engineer at the University of Alberta. The pandemic has made UVC light disinfection much more popular, with hospitals and even the New York City subway system buying into the technology.
UVC light doesn’t discriminate when it comes to ruining genetic material, though, and can damage human skin and eye cells. Some particular UVC wavelengths have been associated with skin cancer or cataracts
https://www.discovermagazine.com/health/are-ultraviolet-sanitizing-lights-safe-for-humans
Since in Trump’s mind, he is never wrong and when he fails it is always someone or something else’s fault, what will he try on his next crop of children, parents and teacher lab rats in his endless war to defeat the virus.
No one is taking into consideration that a majority of students and school employees in NYC are dependent on public transit, so whatever safety measures and protocols might or might not be possible to implement in schools will be non-existentent on overcrowded subways and buses as soon as schools re-open on a large scale. All the rhetoric about the risks of indoor congregation to prohibit indoor dining, movies, theaters, etc. especially in light of new research about airborne transmission and children being effective asymptomatic spreaders, as well as some disturbing new evidence about the possibility of the long-term effects of COVID-19 are suddenly ignored in the entire dialogue around school reopenings. Teachers should not be asked to sit in tiny poorly ventilated rooms every day with maskless students during lunchtime, unless they are provided with N95s to prevent them from airborne transmission, which of course the city cannot afford to do. Many people are also not taking into consideration that reopening schools will increase the likelihood of a second wave as after Labor Day thousands of New Yorkers will be returning home from other states and colleges are now bringing in out-of-state students as well, at a time when we are preparing to head into cold and flu season. Many of those returning to NY are not quarantining, and as we learned in March, COVID may spread asymptomatically throughout the city until it is too late to recognize and prevent another spike. The bottom line is that the schools are woefully ill-prepared, the planning has been incompetent at best, and there are so many glaring holes and omissions in the DOE’s plan, regarding such fundamentals as testing, tracing, budgeting, staffing, transportation, funding, ventilation, space, supplies, equipment, childcare, scheduling, curriculum, pedagogy, logistics and safety protocols, yet de Blasio has refused to acknowledge any of them, has refused to provide any transparency and has dismissed each one of the stakeholders concerns as “dramatic.” He has also failed to earn anyone’s trust after his reckless, irresponsible and disengenous behavior in March proved to be so disastrous. Teachers, principals, custodians, food service workers’ unions, many local and state officials have all expressed grave concerns about his plan, and the only one who seems to be in denial about this is de Blasio himself (and Corranza who is forced to do his bidding). de Blasio has squandered opportunities to plan proactively, rejecting suggestions to implement small pilot programs and more sensible gradual phased reopening plan, and has not permitted teachers or anyone who actually works in school buildings to have any voice in the planning, nor is he deferring to his own health care and public health experts. If schools reopen as planned Michael Mulgrew, UFT President, is correct to say it will be the one of biggest debacles in NYC history.
I love you Arthur and always will be you have been arguing against schools re-opening for a long time. The demand for 700,000 tests for kids and teachers in one week in order to re-open is not even possible according to Mike Mulgrew when he made the demand. Not sure what that even accomplishes with false negatives and false positives. When you put up a demand you yourself say is impossible, you are showing your cards. You do not want to open. Period. Here is where NY is right now for those of you who do not live in the state.
According to the governor, in the past 24 hours there were 572 new cases and five deaths across the state (YES THE ENTIRE STATE OF NEW YORK population 19,400,000) due to the coronavirus. There were no deaths here in the city.
Hospitalizations dropped to 472 — a new low since March 16th. The numbers of ICU Patients and Intubations are also at their lowest levels since mid-March.
Of the more than 74,000 tests conducted yesterday, 0.77% came back positive. That’s the 16th day in a row of the positivity rate staying below one percent.
European countries with those rates opened and are open successfully. Isreal never mandated masks and opened everything up as normal after a few weeks.
Remote learning is terrible. Private and nonprofit companies that have done it for years with kids who WANT to learn remote have produced high rates of dropouts (graduation rates in the 40s) and learning losses in math. In some big cities 30% of all kids never even logged on. Do not know what NYC stats were since no one was taking formal attendance.
Hello Carol,
The real test will be in the fall and winter when we have colds and flu. How will parents and teachers be able to tell that the sniffles and runny noses are colds and not covid? Will parents have to get their kids tested with these symptoms? Kids and teachers will have to be out of school anyway. So I think we will have massive absenteeism. There’s no way around it. I’ve also asked what will happen when a kid with no mask on sneezes or coughs in the classroom. Will the air be cleaned? No, it won’t. So what will we all do?
If your child has a cold or flu, keep them home. If you worry, take them for a test. I already got my flu shot. I have no problem with schools mandating them. I predict there will be fewer colds And flus because of masks, sanitizers and hand washing. COVID is not going away for a long time …. online learning is a proven failure and damaging for young children.
And will all students follow mask wearing OFF protocols for:
1) sneezing?
2) coughing?
3) nose blowing?
How many schools administrators are aware of the specific guidelines for these three behaviors? Teachers can’t realistically send every kid who sneezes or needs to blow their nose to the nurse
OFF should read CDC
If it were just up to me to take the necessary precautions to stay healthy, I wouldn’t worry as much. Sadly, not all parents keep their kids home from school when they are sick. Not everyone is serious in his/her approach to this virus. In the end, it will be up to every teacher to do what he/she feels necessary to try to avoid catching covid or anything else that will inhibit the immune system. I will do what I have to do to keep myself healthy regardless of what any administrator tells me. That’s the bottom line. Same thing for my husband. Both of his parents are 95 years old and he has to help them on weekends. So I’m pretty concerned.
As I wrote, CSA thought we needed to delay, and so did the city council. In fact, there isn’t even a school calendar yet. And as bad as remote learning may be, it’s a whole lot better than being in the hospital for weeks, or dying, or having members of your family die. In any case, I don’t recall a word in that piece about remote learning. And I’m not at all sure that the people being tested are representative of our students. who have many reasons not to visit doctors. There are many examples of school openings being disasters, some examples of which I’ve provided, in areas considered low risk.
This is a pretty spot-on comment.
It is not true that Israel reopened schools with no issues. Israel reopened schools when the rate was 2% only to suffer a heat wave and abandon the use of masks which resulted in a Kindergarten teacher’s death AND the re-closure of schools.
Carol,
Your comments are not encouraging me to join the Network for Public Education, but I will try to continue to have an open mind. It’s important for all perspectives to be heard, but there seems to be a callousness in your argument.
Your information on infection rates and hospital statistics is very pertinent. But the missing part of the equation is the preparedness of the school facilities.
Like Arthur wrote about not seeing the schools clean (even before covid), the problem is that teachers’ past experiences show us that schools need a lot of changes in order to be safe. For example, in my school, the bathroom faucets sprinkle a little squirt of water and then shut off automatically. How do students wash their hands with so little water?
It’s these kind of details that teachers are concerned about. If the specifics were worked out–including ventilation and lunches and bathrooms and hallways, class sizes, etc.–we would be much more keen on going back into the buildings.
People write that schools will change course when a second wave comes. But who will be the sacrificial lambs?
I think there are ways to re-open school in-person, such as creating our own public education “pods” or outdoor classrooms, but there must be much more creative solutions.
Nothing is being forced on students, but it’s absolutely being forced on staff members. Most of whom have had no say in any of this. And I’m not just talking about teachers, I’m talking about paraprofessionals who are lucky if they make 20,000 a year BEFORE taxes are taken out. Having to deal with such overwhelming matters on a poverty level salary.
Kids Are Bigger ‘Silent Spreaders’ Of COVID-19 Than We Realized
August 21, 2020
Children may be less likely than adults to become severely sick with COVID-19, but mounting evidence shows they may be major silent spreaders of the virus.
A study published this week in the Journal of Pediatrics looked at nearly 200 children who came to urgent care clinics or hospitals associated with Massachusetts General with suspected COVID-19, almost 50 of whom tested positive.
Most of the children were not particularly ill. Only about half who tested positive for had a fever, for example. Many had no symptoms, but had been in contact with someone who had the virus.
Nonetheless, many of the kids had high viral loads in their upper airways, particularly early on in their infections. And, in general, the higher a person’s viral load, the more disease particles they’re likely to exhale when they cough, speak or breathe.
“Intuitively, the more you have, the more you can spread. If you have a million viral particles and you sneeze, compared to somebody who has 1,000, you will spread many more particles,” Dr. Alessio Fasano, director of the Mucosal Immunology and Biology Research Center at Massachusetts General Hospital and an author on the study, told HuffPost.
But that has not been proven.
“Having a high viral load in the nasopharynx (nasal pathways) sounds alarming, but if you think about it from a scientific standpoint, having higher detectable RNA of a virus in the nose may mean that it just stays there in younger children, and not necessarily [that it] spreads down to the lungs, as it might in older teens or adults,” said Dr. Priya Soni, a pediatric infectious disease specialist at Los Angeles’ Cedars-Sinai Medical Center who was not involved in the new study…
“We cannot have high-density classrooms. We cannot have children that move from one classroom to another … [and] they all need to wear masks. Not wearing masks would be a disaster, because that’s how this very high viral load could spread very easily.”
– DR. ALESSIO FASANO, MASSACHUSETTS GENERAL HOSPITAL
Article: https://www.huffpost.com/entry/kids-bigger-silent-spreaders-covid-19_l_5f3eb8e4c5b6305f3254cb1e?utm_campaign=share_email&ncid=other_email_o63gt2jcad4