At PA, if you are a boarding student, but forced to be remote, the incremental Room/board cost above the Day student cost will be refunded. However, to then be a Remote student, you pay the full Day student tuition with NO discount. I know the school has a lot of fixed costs, but the Remote learning experience is terrible and not worth a fraction of the $ cost.
That said, my issues are not even with the $ cost considerations. It is the lack of concern/need from the school leadership to get the school operating in a reasonably normal way … which is totally possible in a conservative way and peer schools are doing it.
As backdrop, we have thought PA is a wonderful school, but are now losing confidence …
@CMKDad I hear your frustration. This all really does suck. And, you might be right. Maybe only allowing 250-300-ish kids on campus is too conservative. I don’t have enough knowledge in this area to understand what it would mean to manage 1000 kids safely on campus. But if they are only bringing 250-300 kids on at a time, I support that being all seniors – that was the “nice” part I was suggesting.
Choate’s approach seems rational in handling the kids currently on campus. There have been some positive cases, but only among day students and faculty living off campus. As positive cases and rates increase in surrounding counties, they switch day students in those counties to remote. Thusfar, it has kept the boarding population free of infection.
I wonder if other schools, like PA, have day students with more influential parents that prevent that strategy from being implemented.
Still keeping my fingers crossed that the kids can go back in January.
In my life off the computer, I refer to 2020 as the year of “the least worst choice”. I think Andover’s plan is definitely a step above Lville. I think it’s great that they’re prioritizing seniors. Obviously it’s better to have everyone on campus, but if they feel they can only safely have a certain amount of students, they’ve made the right choice (or the least worst choice) by prioritizing the seniors. But I strongly feel that giving anyone the chance to be on campus is better than having no one there.
I really wish Lville would prioritize boarders. I know, my apologies to the day students, but for the most part, schools can create a bubble with boarders, reducing the covid risk and also loosening up on restrictions. Whichever schools offered day students a place to board in the beginning of the year had the right idea. Our positive cases, beyond the initial testing, have been day students and faculty. It’s easy to keep faculty from spreading (they’re terrified to get near anyone), but harder for the students to keep their distance from each other (though I’m pretty sure we haven’t had any cases of a student passing it to another). However, our day parents are very vocal. I don’t know how much pull they have, but in zoom meetings, they are definitely the ones speaking up, so I’m guessing the school is worried about upsetting them.
Day parents are local parents. These schools are in their communities. The “politics” of prioritizing boarders are tricky, especially at that price tag. And the reality is that by virtue of being day students, those students are already in a slightly different priority group than boarders. Schools are between a rock and a hard place in working out these policies. They all have faculty and employees who live off campus or who have family members who work/attend school off campus, so cutting off day students because they move in a nd out of the bubble is also a bit inconsistent (or hypocritical if you’re a cynic!)
And yet, they DO make the school more porous and presenta threat to folks on campus. I’m not part of this at any school right now but I can really see everyone’s side in this and no solution will please everyone.
If they “feel” this way then they are being absurd and not thinking, hence the quotes. They just had a semester with ZERO cases. Why all of a sudden are they thinking it’s not safe to come to school. I just don’t buy it. Schools are being absurd and not acting in the best interest of the kids and not basing their decisions on science or fact.
Trust me, I’m with you on this… I have been debating whether or not to email our school to express our disappointment. Our school, in particular, has taken every single safety precaution (other than becoming 100% boarding) and it’s completely overkill. No wonder kids are breaking the rules and/or choosing to leave. But it’s also been clear since the first day that the (majority of) faculty are not on board with in person school. So I just don’t know where they go from here to keep everyone (or even a small majority) happy.
Well, 2020 also defies logic. One BS had only a single case in the boarding population and none in the day!! So, don’t be so sure boarding is safer. Some parents have been very vocal about what is best for their Johnny/Jane at the expense of the other type of student ( boarding or day). Sadly, I think they are being selfish. When someone stands up and says they don’t want to expose their kids but they are willing to let other kids be off campus so their kid can get what they need, that’s showing their true colors.
Everyone has to do their best. Each school needs a plan and people need to follow the rules. Excluding boarders or day students because one group is more vocal is a very bad plan, long term. It will create resentment. If you think that any one group ( Boarding or day) can dictate long term to the other without repercussions, you are wrong. Both pay tuition. And when Covid spreads within a specific BS community, it’s going to be a toss up whether the day/boarders or both get it. It’s likely both will.
I think the schools which have done best are those with a plan and modification. Some seem very loathe to take any chances. Reminds me of a parent who doesn’t want to let their kid drive because something might happen. This is going to be around a long time. The best plans are flexible and have multiple paths depending on what happens.
Re: PA, a couple of other data points that may (partially) further inform the situation:
The dining hall still hasn’t opened at all except for grab and go meals (that’s been one of the canaries in the coal mine for us guessing what would happen). Come winter when tents are not useful dining options, they’d face the choice of either telling all kids they have to go back to their rooms to eat (as some are already doing), or opening up the dining hall. For the latter, it’s possible that they figured that they could safely accommodate +/- 300 kids, say in 2 - 3 shifts. I’m totally spitballing, but it’s possible. Point being that those kinds of numbers would allow for only a single grade worth of kids. Or, say, all of the day students
We have two kids at the school. They have 10 teachers between them. To date, only three (THREE!) out of ten have chosen in-person teaching. To say we are disappointed in this is an understatement. However, what is particular frustrating is the reason cited by more than one of the seven staying remote: they’re saying “if even one kid can’t be here then we’re staying 100% remote.” They’re basically citing some idea of fairness, which is nice in theory and in the abstract…however, I don’t believe this is the real reason. Why? Because other teachers have clearly figured out a way to successfully deliver a hybrid experience. And they are across disciplines (the 3 are math, chem, and art!) so it’s not about this subject or that being untenable for hybrid. (I’d also add that my DD’s dance program is hybrid!) Where there’s a will, there’s a way.
Basically, I believe that at least some of the teachers are worried for their health (or for the health of someone in their household) and are more or less hiding behind this idea of fairness. Now, to be clear, if they’re worried for their health, I’m not here to quibble with that. But please just say that you don’t feel safe. Don’t say/imply that it’s not fair to the kid(s) who can’t be there when not only have other teachers figured it out, but when the school has explicitly provided all boarders (and day students) the choice to be remote. So of course there are going to be kids who can’t be there.
As you all have noted, this is a no-win situation. Can’t please everyone, that’s obvious. Threading the needle between boarders and day is extremely challenging. I just can’t help but feel that while they’ve chosen to (somewhat) please the seniors, they could’ve pleased more people than that.
All that said, @Calliemomofgirls I actually think they will bring everyone back for the spring. I’m not usually an optimist regarding this situation, but I think that’ll be the case. And that was before this morning’s news about the vaccine test results by Pfizer.
Here in Central Indiana, at the suburban local public schools, they’ve been open for hybrid learning (alternate days distance and in-person) since the school year began in August. Though there have been many cases of COVID-19 in the schools (I think 20 or 30 in my local, very large system just in the past week), they are sticking with their plan so far and haven’t closed anything down. As far as I know, there haven’t been any deaths traced to the positive COVID-19 cases on our school system, and I think I would have heard if there were. I haven’t heard of any hospitalizations traced to the LPS system, either, but maybe I wouldn’t have heard about those.
Why can’t they designate other areas where they can eat? That’s what my kid’s school did for lunch.
Half the grades get a hot lunch, half the grades get a boxed lunch, and they alternate, so that they can socially distance and still get food in a a timely fashion.
They can eat in other designated areas (during bad weather this includes gyms, theaters).
The dining situation at our school is incredibly frustrating. We were initially told grab and go would just be done in the beginning and then indoor dining would be available. To this day, they are only allowed to eat outside or in their dorm rooms. The school has three dining halls, and a two hour lunch period. There is no reason they can’t do staggered or alternating lunches while still keeping appropriate distance.
I truly don’t want to take the school experience away from any student. My first choice has always been for all students to be on campus, but if that’s not an option I’d at least rather some kids (whether it be seniors or boarders or day students) be on campus.
I’m also incredibly frustrated that our school is taking every single precaution and has so many great resources to prevent the spread of Covid and yet they’re the first once to close winter term. It just doesn’t add up.
And guess who I just received an email from? The office of development. They should have timed that better!!!
Is anyone else having their kids bring home a lot of stuff in preparation for not returning after New Year? Also, any updates or “hints” from other schools about what will happen for winter term?
@Golfgr8
PA is having each student move out of their rooms for winter break. Some are using College Boxes for local storage, others are taking everything back home.
@Golfgr8 Before our school’s announcement of a remote winter term, the plan was for kiddo to pack anything and everything she might need until March (given it fits in two pieces of checked luggage). The school has now told the kids they have to pack up their rooms before Thanksgiving and then leave the packed boxes in their rooms until March.
I’m not making this a political discussion, but the politics of those two states are very different, well beyond just simply blue and red. State, local and school politics are being mixed with varying degrees of science to result in a ridiculous spectrum of approaches.
We are in Florida and our schools have been fully open since August (with the option to be remote). In my son’s school (K-12, 1000 kids), they’ve had their first 5 cases in the past few weeks. I think they won’t close unless they have several cases in one grade/class. Our public schools have had many cases, but no incidents of spreading, and no signs of closing. Politics definitely matter.
