Covidiots thread

[[DHT]Osiris]

No, my link shows that large loss of learning from just the few months at the end of the previous school year. It didn't even measure the following school year's loss of learning. That got even worse.

'Learning loss' or 'structural racism': What people are saying about the drop in MCAS scores

The results of the 2021 test show an undeniable drop. However, there's disagreement about the root cause: Learning loss or structural racism?

www.boston.com

As for the idea that once we got it set up that remote learning was as good or even remotely (har) as good as in-person learning, I suggest you talk to some teachers, especially elementary school teachers.

And yes, we should fix inequality. Know what a good way to help do that is? In person school, as shown here!

Your links are fighting you, again.

Literally the teachers union saying the score drops are primarily in low income regions, where factors other than the education are leading to drops in scores.

 

[fskimospy]

The stereotypical pre-pandemic 'home schooled' child wasn't socially stunted because of home schooling, they were usually stunted because the kinds of parents that home schooled also tended to a) isolate those children, and b) be a bit nutty themselves. In addition to that, they were doing what everyone else wasn't, necessarily isolating them further. If everyone's remote, there's nothing socially weird about remote/at home learning.

Or maybe the right answer is the obvious one - remote schooling is bad for socialization because when you sit at home in front of a computer you socialize less than you do in a school full of people your age.

I mean come on, the answer here is obvious.

 

[[DHT]Osiris]

Or maybe the right answer is the obvious one - remote schooling is bad for socialization because when you sit at home in front of a computer you socialize less than you do in a school full of people your age.

I mean come on, the answer here is obvious.

It's obvious to you because you want it to be obvious. I would have benefited dramatically from remote learning in my youth, as I've benefited dramatically from remote work as an adult. Don't assume everyone has the same requirements, and never assume that everyone would be willing to accept dead kids so some others got their preferred social treatment.

 

[fskimospy]

Your links are fighting you, again.
View attachment 50863
Literally the teachers union saying the score drops are primarily in low income regions, where factors other than the education are leading to drops in scores.

lol no they are not, you are engaging in motivated reasoning because you don't want to admit I'm right. The article says the teachers union is fighting against returning to schools, of course they wouldn't admit the lack of in-person learning is a problem! I mean what would they say, 'man those kids really are being harmed for life, but we still aren't going back, lol.'

To see how silly this argument is imagine this were a different thread and someone said 'but the police union said the rise of deaths in custody was due to factors other than the police'. What would you think of that?

 

[fskimospy]

It's obvious to you because you want it to be obvious. I would have benefited dramatically from remote learning in my youth, as I've benefited dramatically from remote work as an adult. Don't assume everyone has the same requirements, and never assume that everyone would be willing to accept dead kids so some others got their preferred social treatment.

It's obvious to me because the data backs me up. You're totally correct that SOME students benefit from remote learning. The evidence is clear that the average one does not, however.

 

[woolfe9998]

No, my link shows that large loss of learning from just the few months at the end of the previous school year. It didn't even measure the following school year's loss of learning. That got even worse.

'Learning loss' or 'structural racism': What people are saying about the drop in MCAS scores

The results of the 2021 test show an undeniable drop. However, there's disagreement about the root cause: Learning loss or structural racism?

www.boston.com

As for the idea that once we got it set up that remote learning was as good or even remotely (har) as good as in-person learning, I suggest you talk to some teachers, especially elementary school teachers.

And yes, we should fix inequality. Know what a good way to help do that is? In person school, as shown here!

Verified. My sister teaches third grade (for 25 years now) and says the remote learning was terrible. Parents were not supervising during lessons because they are used to having a total break from that during school hours. These kids would disappear from the screen frame, off doing who knows what, during lessons. Some were playing video games on hand held consoles. There was nothing she could do. Her opinion is that it was barely better than no schooling at all.

 

[[DHT]Osiris]

lol no they are not, you are engaging in motivated reasoning because you don't want to admit I'm right. The article says the teachers union is fighting against returning to schools, of course they wouldn't admit the lack of in-person learning is a problem! I mean what would they say, 'man those kids really are being harmed for life, but we still aren't going back, lol.'

To see how silly this argument is imagine this were a different thread and someone said 'but the police union said the rise of deaths in custody was due to factors other than the police'. What would you think of that?

If the data shows that the majority of score loss is from poor and minority districts, as it stated in your first link, then the data backs up the teacher's union, not your feels. A loss of productivity during the beginning of a new way of teaching (even for a few years) is completely expected, and still worth it to save children. I'm pretty shocked anyone would argue otherwise.

Who the fuck even remembers half the shit they told us to rote memorize in school anyhow? Who still keeps in touch with 90% of the people they socialized with? How is this bullshit worth dead children, and the ripple effect that comes from that?

 

[NWRMidnight]

By this logic before the pandemic home schooled children should be as well socialized or even better socialized than their in-person school counterparts.

Does anyone seriously want to make that argument?

I know a lot of home schooled children/adults who have zero issues with socializing, and have better social skills than most in-person school counterparts. In person schooling teaches a lot of bad behaviors that you rarely find in home schooled children.

 

[fskimospy]

If the data shows that the majority of score loss is from poor and minority districts, as it stated in your first link, then the data backs up the teacher's union, not your feels.

No it does not. It shows, consistent with the research, that poor and minority children benefit more from school than wealthier children do. So sure, we could solve societal inequality, but absent that if we want to help poor and minority kids we can send them back to school because public schools are one of the best tools we have at reducing inequality.

To be clear I've spend a great deal of time working in education policy and educational research so this is literally my field.

A loss of productivity during the beginning of a new way of teaching (even for a few years) is completely expected, and still worth it to save children. I'm pretty shocked anyone would argue otherwise.

Who the fuck even remembers half the shit they told us to rote memorize in school anyhow? Who still keeps in touch with 90% of the people they socialized with? How is this bullshit worth dead children, and the ripple effect that comes from that?

The data indicates that this loss is ongoing because, wait for it, remote school sucks for a lot of kids, particularly younger ones!

Do you know anyone with elementary age children or any elementary school teachers? Have you asked them how they manage to get a 6 year old to sit in a zoom class all day?

 

[fskimospy]

I know a lot of home schooled children/adults who have zero issues with socializing, and have better social skills than most in-person school counterparts. In person schooling teaches a lot of bad behaviors that you rarely find in home schooled children.

So to be clear you are arguing that there is no significant difference in socialization between home schooling and in person schooling?

Just want to be 100% sure that's what you're saying.

 

[woolfe9998]

If the data shows that the majority of score loss is from poor and minority districts, as it stated in your first link, then the data backs up the teacher's union, not your feels. A loss of productivity during the beginning of a new way of teaching (even for a few years) is completely expected, and still worth it to save children. I'm pretty shocked anyone would argue otherwise.

Who the fuck even remembers half the shit they told us to rote memorize in school anyhow? Who still keeps in touch with 90% of the people they socialized with? How is this bullshit worth dead children, and the ripple effect that comes from that?

Socializing isn't about whether you keep in touch with someone you knew in third grade. It's about learning to interact with your peers in a healthy way.

Nor does it matter whether you remember what they told you to "rote memorize." That argument could just as easily justify no schooling at all.

Another point that is lost here is that homeschooling is not the same thing as remote learning. With home schooling, there is a parent present who is teaching the child. As I mentioned in an above post about my sister's experience, these kids were unsupervised by their parents, while she had the entire responsibility and it was nigh impossible as the kids were too distracted being at home, and she was at a disadvantage not being able to see them when they wandered off. Homeschool parents don't have those disadvantages.

 

[[DHT]Osiris]

To be clear I've spend a great deal of time working in education policy and educational research so this is literally my field.

Alright then, from your professional capacity to present such information, exactly how many dead children is an acceptable number to you to preserve this perverse version of education we as a western country have come to accept as normal?

Do you know anyone with elementary age children or any elementary school teachers? Have you asked them how they manage to get a 6 year old to sit in a zoom class all day?

Ironically, yes, I do. It's sucked terribly for them, but they've done it. Also, their kids are alive.

 

[fskimospy]

Alright then, from your professional capacity to present such information, exactly how many dead children is an acceptable number to you to preserve this perverse version of education we as a western country have come to accept as normal?

Ignoring the ludicrous tone of your question the evidence indicates to me that the risk to children's health from covid is roughly equivalent or less than that of the flu. To me that is not a sufficient risk to harm all children with remote learning.

Ironically, yes, I do. It's sucked terribly for them, but they've done it. Also, their kids are alive.

But earlier you claimed this was just an initial disruption that has since been fixed. Do you think they feel it's been fixed?

 

[Hail The Brain Slug]

Ignoring the ludicrous tone of your question the evidence indicates to me that the risk to children's health from covid is roughly equivalent or less than that of the flu. To me that is not a sufficient risk to harm all children with remote learning.


But earlier you claimed this was just an initial disruption that has since been fixed. Do you think they feel it's been fixed?

"ludicrous tone"

Listen buddy, you're the one who played the "I'm an expert therefore I'm right and you're wrong" card.

 

[[DHT]Osiris]

But earlier you claimed this was just an initial disruption that has since been fixed. Do you think they feel it's been fixed?

It's fixed for them (in fact, one of their three is having the best year of his education, score-wise), but I wasn't going to use anecdotes as evidence.

I suspect in districts that have figured out how to do remote learning properly, and get appropriate support from parents, scores are probably normalizing. Also, they don't have dead kids.

Also, here:

Thirty-Day Outcomes of Children and Adolescents With COVID-19: An International Experience

OBJECTIVES To characterize the demographics, comorbidities, symptoms, in-hospital treatments, and health outcomes among children and adolescents diagnosed or hospitalized with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) and to compare them in secondary analyses with patients diagnosed with previous...

pediatrics.aappublications.org

RESULTS A total of 242 158 children and adolescents diagnosed and 9769 hospitalized with COVID-19 and 2 084 180 diagnosed with influenza were studied. Comorbidities including neurodevelopmental disorders, heart disease, and cancer were more common among those hospitalized with versus diagnosed with COVID-19. Dyspnea, bronchiolitis, anosmia, and gastrointestinal symptoms were more common in COVID-19 than influenza. In-hospital prevalent treatments for COVID-19 included repurposed medications (<10%) and adjunctive therapies: systemic corticosteroids (6.8%–7.6%), famotidine (9.0%–28.1%), and antithrombotics such as aspirin (2.0%–21.4%), heparin (2.2%–18.1%), and enoxaparin (2.8%–14.8%). Hospitalization was observed in 0.3% to 1.3% of the cohort diagnosed with COVID-19, with undetectable (n < 5 per database) 30-day fatality. Thirty-day outcomes including pneumonia and hypoxemia were more frequent in COVID-19 than influenza.
CONCLUSIONS Despite negligible fatality, complications including hospitalization, hypoxemia, and pneumonia were more frequent in children and adolescents with COVID-19 than with influenza. Dyspnea, anosmia, and gastrointestinal symptoms could help differentiate diagnoses. A wide range of medications was used for the inpatient management of pediatric COVID-19.

Please remember that COVID-19 isn't just an upper respiratory infection, it's a blood disease, that we still do not know the long-term (potentially life-long) effects from, BEYOND any mortalities (which are at minimum doubled from flu-only, if fatalities stay vaguely in-line with flu).

So again, how many child fatalities are acceptable to you, so things can go back to normal? 10? 100? 10,000? Let me know if I'm getting warm.

 

[fskimospy]

"ludicrous tone"

Yep!

Listen buddy, you're the one who played the "I'm an expert therefore I'm right and you're wrong" card.

I never claimed that my opinion was correct because of my experience, I claimed it was correct because it is consistent with the research, which it is.

In a place where people can disagree like adults someone having directly relevant knowledge and experience would be something people would like to know and would consider relevant to the discussion. I know I do!

I guess not everyone here shares that interest.

 

[[DHT]Osiris]

Yep!



I never claimed that my opinion was correct because of my experience, I claimed it was correct because it is consistent with the research, which it is.

In a place where people can disagree like adults someone having directly relevant knowledge and experience would be something people would like to know and would consider relevant to the discussion. I know I do!

I guess not everyone here shares that interest.

Oh come now, you know as well as anyone else here that an appeal to authority is a logical fallacy.

Appeal to Authority Examples

 

[fskimospy]

Oh come now, you know as well as anyone else here that an appeal to authority is a logical fallacy.

Appeal to Authority Examples

It's a frequently misunderstood logical fallacy. For example you both accused me of doing it here when I clearly never did. I even explained to him how I didn't and you still came back with it!

 

[fskimospy]

It's fixed for them (in fact, one of their three is having the best year of his education, score-wise), but I wasn't going to use anecdotes as evidence.

I cannot think of a single elementary school teacher that thinks remote learning is as effective as in-person learning for elementary age kids and I know a ton of them. The data also backs me up on this.

I suspect in districts that have figured out how to do remote learning properly, and get appropriate support from parents, scores are probably normalizing. Also, they don't have dead kids.

What is this based on? Is the idea that Massachusetts as a state, the #1 state for education, couldn't figure it out?

Also, here:

Thirty-Day Outcomes of Children and Adolescents With COVID-19: An International Experience

OBJECTIVES To characterize the demographics, comorbidities, symptoms, in-hospital treatments, and health outcomes among children and adolescents diagnosed or hospitalized with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) and to compare them in secondary analyses with patients diagnosed with previous...

pediatrics.aappublications.org

Please remember that COVID-19 isn't just an upper respiratory infection, it's a blood disease, that we still do not know the long-term (potentially life-long) effects from, BEYOND any mortalities (which are at minimum doubled from flu-only, if fatalities stay vaguely in-line with flu).

So again, how many child fatalities are acceptable to you, so things can go back to normal? 10? 100? 10,000? Let me know if I'm getting warm.

This is a transparently stupid question. How many child fatalities are acceptable to you for having cars on the road? 10? 100? 10,000? Let me know if I'm getting warm. I can't believe you would sacrifice so many children for cars.

As for the long term effects of covid you're right we don't know! We DO know that there are significant lifelong negative effects from lack of effective education though, so as long as we're talking long term effects why are we trading potential ones for ones we already know about?[/quote]

 

[Hail The Brain Slug]

It's a frequently misunderstood logical fallacy. For example you both accused me of doing it here when I clearly never did. I even explained to him how I didn't and you still came back with it!

You clearly did. You're saying because "this is your field" your interpretation of the data is the correct interpretation, and are therefore invalidating his.

 

[[DHT]Osiris]

I cannot think of a single elementary school teacher that thinks remote learning is as effective as in-person learning for elementary age kids and I know a ton of them. The data also backs me up on this.

Never said it was, but unlike you, I think it's an acceptable substitute for dead children (how many again?)

we already know about?

But we don't already know about the 'dramatic, long-term effects' of that reduced socialization in learning in the US, because we haven't experienced it yet. We've experienced the effects of COVID quite well though.

 

[fskimospy]

You clearly did. You're saying because "this is your field" your interpretation of the data is the correct interpretation, and are therefore invalidating his.

If you believe that I argued that because I have expertise in the field that my interpretation MUST be the correct one then please quote it. If not, please admit you don't understand what an appeal to authority is.

This is what I mean about people not understanding this logical fallacy. Here, I'll help you understand it. An appeal to authority is when someone claims that because an authority says X, X MUST be true. This is indeed fallacious! What is NOT an appeal to authority is when someone says that due to a person's expertise their opinion is MORE LIKELY to be correct. This is just the sort of logical inference that people make every day because...duh. To use a real life example let's say you are ill and have a doctor examine you and a five year old examine you. The doctor says you have the flu and the kid says you have butterflies in your stomach like the guy does in that old game Operation. Does the doctor being a doctor mean his opinion MUST be correct? Of course not! Is it MORE LIKELY to be correct than the kid's! I think so!

Make sense now?

So anyway as I already told you the reason my opinion on the issue is correct is the data I cited about the harms to children from remote learning. The fact that I routinely work with this data is primarily relevant to let you know that I have significant general knowledge in this area and the other evidence is not missing critical context or whatever.

 

[fskimospy]

Never said it was, but unlike you, I think it's an acceptable substitute for dead children (how many again?)

Again this is a transparently stupid question. After all, you're the one who is apparently just fine with sacrificing untold numbers of children just to have cars on the road. How monstrous.

Every choice we make has costs, and sometimes dead children are among them! After all if we wanted to keep the maximum number of children alive we should never let them out of the house for any reason. How many dead kids is going to a playground worth to you?

But we don't already know about the 'dramatic, long-term effects' of that reduced socialization in learning in the US, because we haven't experienced it yet. We've experienced the effects of COVID quite well though.

We have strong evidence that fewer attended instruction days leads to less learning and less learning is generally associated with lower income and a variety of other social ills. It's not directly analogous but it's a strong indicator!

 

[[DHT]Osiris]

After all, you're the one who is apparently just fine with sacrificing untold numbers of children just to have cars on the road.

Appeal to extremes, another logical fallacy. You're the one that specifically said that dead children was worth a better education, I just asked how many. Nobody brought up shit about cars except you.

How many dead kids is going to a playground worth to you?

Ironic considering we've made changes to playgrounds to specifically increase their safety.

generally associated with lower income and a variety of other social ills.

Relative to peers, if all peers are in the same boat, there's no gradient. See: all of human history.

It's not directly analogous but it's a strong indicator!

Ahh so now it's not proof positive, it's just a strong indicator. There's far more than a strong indicator that dead children cause a dramatic negative effect on the social fabric of society, so I'll take no dead kids over 'strong indicators'.

 

[Hail The Brain Slug]

If you believe that I argued that because I have expertise in the field that my interpretation MUST be the correct one then please quote it. If not, please admit you don't understand what an appeal to authority is.

This is what I mean about people not understanding this logical fallacy. Here, I'll help you understand it. An appeal to authority is when someone claims that because an authority says X, X MUST be true. This is indeed fallacious! What is NOT an appeal to authority is when someone says that due to a person's expertise their opinion is MORE LIKELY to be correct. This is just the sort of logical inference that people make every day because...duh. To use a real life example let's say you are ill and have a doctor examine you and a five year old examine you. The doctor says you have the flu and the kid says you have butterflies in your stomach like the guy does in that old game Operation. Does the doctor being a doctor mean his opinion MUST be correct? Of course not! Is it MORE LIKELY to be correct than the kid's! I think so!

Make sense now?

So anyway as I already told you the reason my opinion on the issue is correct is the data I cited about the harms to children from remote learning. The fact that I routinely work with this data is primarily relevant to let you know that I have significant general knowledge in this area and the other evidence is not missing critical context or whatever.

Context. Nuance. Learn them.

You lost my respect in one fell swoop.