1/ So hey, this CDC doc! I like it more than I expected (this may say more about my expectations than the doc). But let’s start w/ what it’s not: it’s NOT a fed govt doc mandating return under X conditions & it's NOT prohibiting return until X conditions are met.

2/ What it is is a solid compendium of what seem to be largely legit evidence-based observations and recommendations. There wasn’t a ton I disagreed with, but it definitely leaves me with some unanswered questions.

3/ Let’s look at some of the main differences between this guidance and what we had previously. Here’s one:

Old CDC: You should try to keep 6 ft apart where feasible
Districts: Ok so what i’m hearing is that 3 ft is ok too
New CDC: I SAID WHAT I SAID

4/ They’re wicked serious abt their 6 ft, more so than almost everything other than masks. And when they say “6 ft if possible” they specify that “if not possible” doesn’t mean “so closer is ok”, it means “so go find a space in school *or in the community* where it’s possible.”

5/ IN THE COMMUNITY. Lots of you know I’ve always been a huge proponent of finding spaces outside of BPS buildings where teachers & RSPs can be w/ high-needs SPED students 5 days/wk. BPS has dismissed this idea out of hand when suggested by @SPEDPac, BTU, City Councilors, etc…

6/ ...so it’s great to see it actually acknowledged. But back to the 6 ft thing: it’s notable that the only talk of barriers that I saw was about using them to make sure ppl distance >6ft, not using them as substitute for being 6 ft apart (like stupid plexiglass shields on desks)

7/ Cohorts/podding! They’re into it. Like SUPER into it, which makes sense - it makes contact tracing/close contact stuff way easier, and if there is a positive/exposure, you can quarantine small group instead of “No one” or “whole school”

8/ BPS has A and B “cohorts” planned, but as far as i can tell, that’s really more about giving 2 days a week in person to gen ed students whose families want in-person, since few classrooms are big enough to hold everyone 6 ft apart at the same time.

9/ But, BPS also has kids who are eligible for in-person 4 days a week, meaning they’re in cohort A and B. Any class that has ANY 4 day a week student *by definition* eliminates that class as having “cohorts” as the CDC defines it.

10/ I’m not entirely sure where teachers fit into the closed cohort thing; it’s a lot easier to do in elementary classrooms than middle/high school, which I think is a big reason that CDC is more comfortable with elementary classes in-person than older students.

11/ Equity! I want to write a whole separate thread on this, but here are highlights: I really like that it says “needs of disadvantaged populations have to be taken into consideration in reopening plans.” It does NOT say “you need to open schools for disadvantaged populations”

12/ And they specifically call attention to and validate the fact that while school closures can have a disproportionate negative effect on Black and Brown families…

13/ ...those families are ALSO disproportionately affected by COVID and thus may be more reticent to send their kids back into school buildings than white families, so STFU you fake-woke neolibs. (OK, I paraphrased that last part. I bet it was in at least one draft tho.)

14/ Re: communities: straight-up says what other countries have been saying forever: if you want schools open, you have to close other stuff. If you leave gyms & restaurants & malls open, you don’t get to bitch about needing to close schools ‘cause of community transmission rate.

15/ I don’t know what this looks like in reality. This is one of the problems with this kind of document: it’s NOT a law or an ordinance or whatever. It doesn’t say yo, Charlie and Marty, roll back your rollbacks or close your schools…

16/ ...it says “this is what responsible govt does” but as ever there’s no real ramification of not x/ doing that besides looking like a jackass to people who read stuff like this but oddly enough that has not proved to be a particularly effective deterrent in the past.

17/ Metrics! They’re not far off from prior CDC ones, except only like 7 of us nerds were paying attention to them then. There’s a lot to say & I have a lot of questions, but incidence rate is easier to parse so let’s do that first: by any calculation, Boston is doubleplusred.

18/ I’m gonna sneak in another plug for that whole “BPHC completely misinterpreted CDC guidelines for incidence rate” thing here. I wrote a gigantic thread about it if you want to read it, but the bottom line is that BPHC thinks the CDC’s numbers are daily averages…

19/ ...and not cumulative totals. (Narrator voice: They were cumulative totals.) This is evident here yet again: BPHC core metrics have incidence as daily average while CDC is 7-day total. So if you divide CDC’s numbers as a rough conversion to per-day, it’s...not pretty.

20/ So long story short, we’re WAY into CDC’s red zone for incidence. But so is like everyone else. Not all as bad (Mass. is 14th highest state) but only 5 states are NOT red zone. Note: this doesn’t mean these zones are faulty, it means there’s still a TON of COVID-19 in the US.

21/ But there’s a second metric: percentage of pos. tests in the last 7 days. Please note that after systemic inequality and centipedes (in that order), positivity rates are like the bane of my existence. There are so many ways to calculate them, and there need to be because…

22/ ...if you live in a place w/ a ton of colleges & hospitals [waves from Boston] you have a ton of ppl doing precautionary testing (sometimes multiple times/week) who are asymptomatic w/ no known exposure. If you count all those tests as equal, the rate will be lower.

23/ If you live in a place w/ not a lot of ppl & no colleges & one small health care center, chances are you’re not going to get tested for funsies so very few people who don’t have a good reason to think they might be pos are getting tested. That’s gonna give you a higher rate.

24/ CDC has always said “hey, there’s a bunch of ways to calculate this; you do you.” Also, they don’t get personal identifying info (name/SSN/etc) reported to them, so they can’t de-dupe & HAVE to count repeat testing. This is an oversimplification... https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/lab/resources/calculating-percent-positivity.html

25/ ...but if I don’t move on I’ll never finish, and also I want to read some other wicked smart ppl’s takes on it & I’ll report back in another thread. BUT! I almost forgot a really crucial point: CDC says if you’re cool in one metric but fxcked in the other, USE THE WORSE ONE.

26/ That then triggers a series of different mitigation strategies they suggest you use. I say suggest b/c again, being in red zone does not mean CDC mandates you do all of them, they just want you to know that you’re an asshole if you don’t.

27/ Realizing there’s no way I’m finishing this in one go, esp as I haven’t even really gotten into mitigation strategies. And I promised my poor neglected semi-feral children I’d deal with some dragons with them like six hours ago. But I do need to get this in here:

28/ Throughout the whole document, every single recommendation is given w/ assumption that there’s actual adherence to masking & distancing of 6 ft or more. They basically say, look, if you can’t do those two things, you’re putting ppl in danger by bringing them into buildings.

29/ Dunno about you but I’ve been paying close attention to the “yay we reopened” photos posted & retweeted by BPS schools & admin recently. And I can tell you with a tremendous degree of certain that BPS is NOT adhering to consistent & correct masking and distancing.

30/ I’m not gonna repost the photos; you can find them if you want. But I want to be CRYSTAL-EFFING-CLEAR on this point: what I’m seeing is NOT negligence on the part of teachers. It’s the reality of who kids are, what our school buildings are, and what it means to be a teacher.

31/ I want to dig into this more (along with, y’know, the rest of the doc): if CDC says you have to have masking & distancing under control, and you demonstrably can’t, what do you do? CDC has thoughts & so do I, but you’ll need to wait for me for deal with some dragons first.