walkitout | Entries tagged with epftf

And let me just say, Fellow USonians, it has definitely been forty days of wandering in the wilderness. There are people out there promising all kinds of shit, both desirable and dire, and I wish I could say the dire stuff being promised was implausible but sadly, not so much.

Also, it has been 40 days of relentlessly finding more ways to increase the spread of C19. We are indeed getting sick and tired of winning!

When I wrote EPftF, I framed the choice as between two options. There was and is an ongoing non-option (Before Times Normal) that people are really having trouble letting go of.

Cue Elsa.

Moving on. Just because they cannot move on does not stop the calendar, and it is the middle of July.

As in the Before Times, we will not have uniformity of strategy for school — not at the school, district, state levels, so, you know, thinking there will be a national strategy is to laugh.

The GOOD NEWS is that the very, very, very USonian desire for individual choice has actually worked in our favor here. I mean, it is a little grim! But we have plenty of people who were “super careful” who decided that around the beginning of July would be a good time to relax their guard who are now sick, so the “super careful” people have now abandoned the hope that we could Get Back to Normal By the Fall. And the super careful people never actually thought that anyway. The strategic thinkers at every level of risk tolerance could always tell that going back to school in the Fall was Not On, because say what you will about the effects of the virus on children, the virus is pretty awful when it comes to older people (risk increases by age, and accelerates as it goes). And I do not know if you have noticed, but schools are not run by children.

Finally, the summer camp experiment has presented results in the form of Kanakuk and some Y camps in Georgia and similar, and no one likes how that turned out.

So while _today_, it is not yet widely understood, as a practical matter, we are done with the decision of whether to go All Remote or Everyone Back to School. We are opting for hybrid, for the most part. Fortunately, the choice factor has ensured that enough people voted for 100% remote that there should be plenty of space in schools and MIGHT be enough available staff to teach some number of kids in schools, some number of days. And they will be the kids whose parents chose for them to be there, thus reducing a lot of the conflict.

Next up: paying for it!

I am going to go for a walk.

I probably will NOT actually write something about the probable mental / emotional impacts of returning to in-person schooling in the fall. It is too depressing, and we are going to be watching it happen around the country to a lot of kids who supposedly Really Need In Person Schooling, and it is just going to be another example of how people who really need stuff wind up getting the short end over and over and over again.

Expect edits, especially over the weekend. I am actively looking for coverage of what school districts saw in terms of attendance and engagement _at the end_ of the academic year (so, not interested in what was going on in April, and only very marginally interested in May, mostly the last week or so). By that point, the “easy” (ha ha ha) parts of the transition had been done: the decision to close schools was made in March, the uncertainty of what to do next happened in April, and by May, schools were doing some kind of kinda sorta not mandatory and not graded schooling remotely in May. They had figured out how to get food to the kids, hot spots, devices, but were still ironing out individual technical problems, teachers were still figuring out how to do their side of things and districts were trying to triage curriculum decisions. By the end of May, some kind of routine was achieved. Absenteeism and lack of engagement at that point should have been low — I want to know who was still not engaging, why, and what efforts were made to connect.

https://www.wkbn.com/news/national-world/educators-look-at-online-absenteeism-as-virus-forces-continued-distance-learning/

Hartford, 20% not engaged, maybe a third making some effort but not a lot. As I expected: “Among students considered most at risk because of issues including past absenteeism, disciplinary problems and poor academic performance, less than half are participating at all.”

“At the 4,800-student Jamestown Public Schools in the southwest corner of New York, superintendent Bret Apthorpe said about 75% are engaged and most of the others participate at least somewhat. Around 1%, he said, have “fallen off the map.””

“ It’s important for people to know that people are shouldering up. People are working really hard to make it work. People are hopeful, people are resilient. And because of that, we are able to keep students engaged,” she said. “I have not been told by a parent, ‘Oh, we’re not doing this.’ They may be having a difficult time doing it, but parents want their students to succeed, and they want to work with us.” Batchelor is an elementary school principal. Earlier in the article, she noted that they were trying to make sure the parents knew school was happening, and trying to figure out what was needed. Some visits were made in conjunction with people who could connect families with other services.

https://www.bostonglobe.com/2020/06/22/metro/one-third-providence-students-were-chronically-absent-during-distance-learning/

Ignore everything but this:

“During distance learning, attendance did increase – slightly.”

Providence schools have been taken _away_ from local control, because they do so poorly. And that was pre-pandemic.The mind boggles here, really.

Ok, this bit is tantalizing as well: “We have engaged a whole new group of students who really like [distance learning,]” said Harrison Peters, the district’s new superintendent. “But we’ve also disenfranchised a group of students that just don’t like it.””

https://www.postbulletin.com/news/education/6557195-Student-attendance-slumps-during-distance-learning

Detailed attendance data with bar charts and dates selected for comparison; nothing useful in terms of understanding who and why. Rochester, Minnesota

Status Quo Ante — Pre Pandemic Normal — is not a plausible choice in the United States other than in a few exceptional locations (if there). Most strategies for reopening school in the fall by using a combination of the techniques listed in the previous post cost money and will encounter resistance from one or more groups. Status Quo post-middle-of-March is the comparator that is likely to win, unless resistance to ongoing remote / distance learning is substantially greater than an alternative strategy cobbled together from what I listed.

One of the best reasons for planning for the first few months — 100 days, until the winter break, however you want to think about it — is that we should know by then whether the first several vaccine candidates are safe, and what kind of efficacy, if any, they have at establishing any immune response and we may have some indication about how lasting that immune response can be expected to be. The impossible to navigate landscape of Right Now should — especially if we continue broadly with distance learning and work from home — offer some better options. One possible better option is if the country as a whole has reduced total cases and new daily cases to a level that is compatible with opening schools generally. This will especially become possible if screening strategies based on wastewater testing go from academic idea to engineering reality. That option does not require any successful vaccine to cautiously proceed to open schools more broadly, with the understanding that as soon as something shows up in the wastewater, it is back to remote learning again. Districts that could never afford to do “enough” of the list in the previous post may find this to be much more affordable. Districts that did not have transmission within the school, but kept having to quarantine sections due to cases that were acquired outside the school, would have a bit more warning at least some of the time, if wastewater monitoring were done not just in the schools, but in the region.

A vaccine that creates an effective immune response that lasts at least one year in one of the early candidates would then present school districts with a specific question to answer: can we get enough of the school population immunized to attain herd immunity? When? There will be a lot of vaccine available for those candidates by the end of the year, but it is less clear who will be prioritized, and how long it will take for individual districts to use vaccines to make school reopening in person a reality. Some districts might also struggle with paying for the vaccine, and with convincing enough of the school population to get the vaccine.

School systems should plan to make remote / distance learning more effective for all participants, but I want to draw specific attention to where I started: the Behavior Kids Conundrum. We have a pretty complex system for trying to help kids who struggle. There are carrots. There are sticks. But most of all, we have a really detailed truancy system to make sure kids actually attend school. And basically all of that is entirely undeveloped in remote / distance learning, at least as it was initially practiced in the spring of 2020. School systems need to figure out how to make sure that attendance is tracked, parents are notified, and interventions are designed to make it difficult and uncomfortable and a few other things, too, to skip school. Kids who actually “show up”, even if that is virtual, are kids that teachers have a shot at connecting to and educating. Kids who do not show up, are kids that teachers cannot help. Obviously, basic needs (food, shelter, safety) come first, and early steps need to be focused on addressing problems that are preventing kids from accessing remote / distance learning (supplying devices, hot spots, helping troubleshoot technical problems, providing support to English language learners, etc.). Obviously, kids who are caring for sick family members, taking care of younger family members, etc., should NOT be subjected to punitive aspects of truancy systems. Kids who are helping financially support their family should be worked with very sensitively. Kids who are depressed or anxious or suffering from other emotional health issues should be connected where possible to additional support. We have all been completely overwhelmed, far too overwhelmed to figure out how to replace so many things that we once did in person, in meetings, by visiting a home, with some socially distanced equivalent. We have also, however, been too skeptical of the possibility of replacing many of these things with a socially distanced equivalent.

We spent decades telling each other so many things had to be done face to face or in person. It would not be as good, if done remotely. We spent decades using this as a reason to avoid figuring out how to do things remotely, for people who were immuno-compromised, for people who had significant mental health challenges, for people who were distant from the services and opportunities they wanted to make use. We blew our decades of practice with a safety net. So now, we gotta do it the hard way.

We can keep focusing all our attention on how to Get Back to Normal, In Person Education. A very, very possible outcome of that is persistently high numbers of cases, high numbers of daily cases, community transmission that is expensive to track, and no vaccine ever that produces lasting immunity. I hope that does not happen. But if we iteratively improve remote / distance learning, if we diligently find ways to do what needs to be done remotely, or in a socially distanced way, we can educate our children effectively, whether we get a vaccine or not.

Even if a completely new pandemic comes along a few months or years after we finally get this one figured out.

The CDC has released a decision tool for schools considering reopening. The first item on the list is: “Will reopening be consistent with applicable state and local orders?”

As one would expect based on the history of public health decisions in the United States AND the deep history of local control of decisions relating to schooling, local and state decisionmaking is explicitly deferred to by federal policy.

Their considerations document clearly states this as well:

“These considerations are meant to supplement—not replace—any state, local, territorial, or tribal health and safety laws, rules, and regulations with which schools must comply.”

With the exceptions noted in previous posts (isolated communities that either have very little travel in and out, or places like Hawaii which were able to control their borders, enforce quarantines, and had few cases and have gotten new cases down to a very low level), I have read these statements and the lack of real detail on how to go about reopening as essentially stating: We Hate To Be the Ones to Tell You, But, NO.

There are other ways to interpret these statements. The states and large cities in our countries operate as experimental laboratories for all kinds of ideas in governance; things that are popular and/or seem effective then will be replicated elsewhere as other areas notice and eventually scale up to the national level. So in a way, the CDC is inviting localities to decide on their own when and how to reopen, with the understanding that we all get to be experiments in how (not) to do this.

Keep all that in mind when you see proposals for reopening. What follows is a list of What To Do To Reopen, organized by category. Any given proposal will have some combination from this list, and will usually have more than one item from more than one category. Mix and match, basically, endless variations on a theme.

(1) Reduce the total number of people in the small room, so that social distancing is (more / sort of) possible. Ideas in this space include A/B schedules (half the kids go for a day or a week or whatever, then they switch), choosing particular grades to attend in person (perhaps on A/B schedules) and having the other grades continue with remote / distance learning, surveying the population of parents and asking who wants to go back soon vs later, and, if the numbers seem reasonable, allowing people to volunteer to go back first vs second vs later.

(2) Create pods or sections so that if a case is found and close contacts must be quarantined, it will not be all of the school. Ideas in this space include no recess, eating meals in the classrooms at desks, keeping one teacher with a group of kids through the whole day.

(3) Screening and testing: filling out a form each morning, perhaps on a phone, answering questions about symptoms, perhaps taking temperature at home before going to school, taking temperature on arrival at school and perhaps again later in the day, testing wastewater at the school, testing students twice a week.’

(4) Using physical barriers to limit transmission: masks, barriers around each desk, barriers around each seat in the cafeteria, barriers to create separated spaces within a classroom.

(5) Additional cleaning: at night, throughout the day, of objects, of hands.

(6) Reduced sharing of items which might transmit disease.

(7) Increase air exchange: open windows, doors, do not just recirculate air but include outside air, keep filters clean and replace often, possibly redesign ventilation system, hold classes outdoors where possible.

(8) Movement rules to reduce the amount of in-passing contact: one way halls and stairs, eliminating use of elevators except where absolutely necessary.

Every single change in a school breaks something else. Increased cleaning means there will be a lot more chemicals around to become their own problem. Opening doors and windows can increase exposure to pollen or pollution and make temperature regulation much more difficult. Reducing sharing of items strains budgets or creates equity issues if students must bring their own items. Some of these are pointed out in the CDC document, but some of the things that get broken are easy to miss.

For example: cleverly creating an A/B schedule that lets everyone go back to school part time may seem — if well-designed — like a great way to reduce risk and avoid equity problems, regression, etc. However, when my friend talked about that with her children, she was surprised to learn that both kids hated the idea, even tho her kids really wanted to go back. The reasons, once she figured them out, were sound: with smaller classrooms, and no ability to see friends outside of class at recess and lunch, most of the social appeal of school is eliminated. If your friend(s) are not in your section, why bother at all? And with smaller sections, the odds are pretty bad. Additionally, a lot of the appeal of school from home is the malleability of most of the schedule: school systems that have a limited amount of zoom meetings and pick reasonable times for them equal I Get to Sleep More. But if you have to go back to getting up early in the morning every other day or every other week, you will probably wind up waking up early every day. An A/B schedule, astonishingly, may be worse than remote learning for kids who otherwise want to go back.

Surveys sent to parents to figure out what will work and what will not may also fail to capture this kind of concern, especially if the parent fills it out without consulting adequately with the children. Given that compliance on the part of the students is absolutely necessary to maintain staff willingness to work (or we are right back to fearing kids coughing on them on purpose), the hazards here are real.

I am not going to ask anyone to be grateful. Fuck that anyway. If you want to marinate in how awful this has been, you go there, and you stay there, and you do that hard.

Painful reality is not something to deal with through denial and avoidance. Transitions and change of all sort are tough, even when we want them, and quite a few elements of this one were ... not wanted.

A core component of the Now Times is rapidity of change. All planning — even education planning for the fall — requires a realistic appraisal of what we know, what we do not know, and at what point the planning product — the plan — is too late to have been worth producing. I am writing about EPftF because it is coming up Real Soon Now. August is definitely too late to figure this out.

EPftF needs to be done by August, for sure. But how much of the school year needs to be planned by then? I mean, we got into the school year we are currently wrapping up with a plan that is NOT AT ALL how it actually turned out. The plan went right out in the middle of March. I do not see how we can expect of ourselves a plan that gets us all the way to March 2021. But maybe get to Winter Break? Our school superintendent is talking in terms of planning the first 100 days. I think those are roughly equal.

Status quo bias is a powerful force. However, there are powerful forces against status quo ante (The Before Times, Pre-Pandemic Normal, etc.) and status quo (current form of remote / distance learning). The next few posts will contemplate variations / iterative improvements on those two forms, as possible alternatives. Even if you have favorites, I hope you contemplate alternates and run them by people you like to mull things over with. If we can all be flexible, and talk together about what might work and how, we will learn what we care about. Schools are a manifestation of collective values. If those values do not include flexibility, and willingness to BOTH actually commit to Making Something Happen and a willingness to modify what we make happen when things do not work as we had imagined, we are all well and truly fucked.

When thinking about how to reopen schools / get back to normal / ensure that our children are educated in the Now Times, it is easy to fall prey to despair.

We may never have a safe and effective vaccine.

We might have a vaccine, but it might only provide limited and/or temporary immunity. Getting the disease might also provide only limited and/or temporary immunity.

Current cases / new daily cases in the United States / our part of the United States might remain stubbornly too high to safely open schools in any in-person format for months or even years.

We might be dealing with a polarized school system, in which some people want to go back to pre-Pandemic normal NOW and vote accordingly, and be unable to find any staff willing to actually open up the school.

We might find that exactly those families which we most desperately want to reach — English language learners, special needs, kindergarten and early primary students, families experiencing DV, families who cannot get basic needs such as adequate food and shelter — are the ones most resistant to integration into whatever plan we devise for education going forward.

We might put together a delightful plan that our local department of health signs off on, that enables us to open with some clever allocation of resources that makes every parent happy and lets everyone get back to work — and that students hate and/or cannot comply with.

I want to acknowledge here that despair is a rational response to this situation. Despair is the absence of hope. And hope is a shitty plan. Let us instead contemplate how to make a good plan.

Some schools in other countries have reopened. Generally speaking, there is coverage of this when it is about to happen or starts happening. However, at least in major US publications, there is only very rarely follow up to see how it went over a period of weeks. This is unfortunate, however, it is possible to follow up with local media coverage, altho it may require finding someone who can translate the language of the country in question to access the information. Google translate works in a pinch.

It would be very useful to identify comparators who have succeeded and who have not succeeded, so that we can learn from their efforts. This is how best practice improves over time. However, as anyone who has shopped for housing knows, location matters.

For example, Denmark has had good success in reopening schools without incident. However, their borders through most (all?) of the period of reopening have been closed. They are a small country. They never had a large outbreak. They are starting to open their borders now, but have indicated a reluctance to open the border with Sweden, _to which they are connected by a bridge_, because they do not want to import cases from a country which has had a much larger outbreak and much greater spread. Denmark is smaller in population than Massachusetts and, more importantly, Massachusetts cannot close its borders. There are places in the United States that might share enough physical isolation and border control that they can use Denmark as a model (Hawaii, presumably). My state is not one of them.

The NYT did an article about Carolinum Gymnasium in Neustrelitz Germany. Der Spiegel did a follow up mention of how that went some weeks later. They tested twice weekly (someone donated the tests, thus satisfying the free criteria), on a “voluntary” basis (but everyone complied, apparently, look it is Germany, I do not ask a lot of questions), and had no positive tests. They are a much larger country than Denmark, and they are not as able to close their borders as completely as Denmark, but they mostly closed their borders, certainly far more than any states in the US with the exceptions of Alaska and Hawaii. Their outbreak was larger than Denmark’s, but not huge, and when the Carolinum Gymnasium opened, it was in the context of quite low and falling new cases per day (I think on the order of 500 new cases per day, scaled per capita, that is less than 1/10 new cases per day in the United States and testing in the US is FAR less comprehensive than in Germany).

There was coverage of a school in Den Haag which opened, however, it had to close. At that time, new cases per day in the Netherlands per capita were very roughly double Germany — still, very far below where the United States is currently.

School districts in the United States which are in areas with very little travel to and through them, and which have very low local case counts and very few new cases might be able to model themselves on Denmark and Germany.

However, the lesson offered by the school in Den Haag is that low enough is really quite low, and the source of transmission that results in school closure is not going to be fixable with cleaning in the schools, and testing only detects problems after they have established themselves. What is going on in the outside community is what matters, and it is not under the control of the school system.

In general, the purpose of testing for a disease is to make treatment decisions and to monitor and control transmission of contagious disease.

If you are not going to treat a condition once found (where treat, for purposes of this sentence, means, do anything differently at all), then you should not test for it. If the decision is made to open a school (or anything else, for that matter), and continue to keep it open with no modifications no matter what test results produce, then you can skip the testing entirely. It is irrelevant, and an added expense.

Any testing plan, thus, should be made in the context of What Will You Do If You Find a Positive Result That Is a Real Result (and for the purposes of this sentence, we are going with: repeatable positive test result in a person who had not previously had the disease. I am assuming we are going to NOT continue to test recovered people who pop positive test results even tho they are recovered. ETA: https://www.statnews.com/2020/06/08/viral-shedding-covid19-pcr-montreal-baby/). Most school reopening plans (reduce density, keep the same teacher with the smaller group of students for the whole day, no congregating in the cafeteria, no congregating on the playground, staggered start / end times) are designed so that if a positive test result occurs (and that could be a person who goes to a doctor for testing NOT sponsored by the school), then only a limited portion of the school would have to stay home and quarantine for 14 days or possibly longer if they too develop symptoms or have a positive test.

I think it is very important that the school system as a whole (parents, staff, teachers, students, taxpayers) clearly understand what will happen in the event of a positive test AND they must find that outcome better than alternative strategies (such as continuing remote / distance learning). There will be emotional distress associated with constantly wondering if this week / today is the day that we go back to remote learning. There is expense associated with the measures taken to “firewall” sections of the school from each other. If the argument is, But Parents Need to Go Back to Work, well, they will not be at work if there is a positive test in one of their children’s sections; they will be back at home distance learning in quarantine. If the argument is, But Kids Need to Be At School to Learn, well, they will not be at school learning if there is a positive test in their section. Even more importantly, even if there is NEVER a case in the school, the modified school structure (A/B schedules, no specials, no playground, no cafeteria, social distancing, wear a mask) may be such a negative experience that it is actually perceived as worse than modified remote / distance learning by an important fraction of the school system.

The school system is made up of people who play multiple roles. Any given participant (other than the kids) partakes of one or more of: parent, teacher, not-a-teacher-but-staff, taxpayer. There is always some amount of conflict between these roles. Testing amplifies this conflict. The teacher who wants kids tested may also be a parent who does not want her child subjected to regular nasopharyngeal swab testing, a taxpayer who has zero interest in paying for the testing directly or indirectly and a voter who does not want any level of government to take on further levels of debt to pay for that testing. Her job might be at risk of being cut to be able to pay for the testing, or she might have friends or family members whose jobs might be cut to pay for testing, or she might object to her child having fewer specialist teachers (music, art, special ed aides, etc.) who might be cut to pay for testing. Teachers are also union members, who will support union goals, and they are voters, who will have opinions expressed in elections and on referenda / questions / initiatives and other ballot items.

I think basically this is what we all want: free, frequent, comprehensive, accurate and painless. We will take Paid For By Someone Else instead of Free subject to the role conflicts (which can be internal to an individual) described above. Testing would not need to be frequent, if a single test could show immunity forever (so, serology testing one time would be fine, if it was accurate and if immunity was lasting). Comprehensive is a dodgy goal, as many people are expected to resist having to be tested themselves / have their children tested.

Currently, we do not know whether or not immunity is lasting. We also are not sure if our tests for immunity are accurate at all. We cannot currently plan based on a future one-time test for lasting immunity; we might never get that, and we do need to educate our children before they become adults.

Other tests (antigen and molecular) are prone to false negatives in people who have newly become ill, and false positives in people who have recovered, which is, basically, exactly what you do not want. It means testing errors let infectious people wander around thinking they are not infected and stop people from returning to their New Normal lives even after they are not infectious any more. Currently, antigen testing is not accurate enough for use as anything other than a screening test; that might change before the fall, but I think it would be unwise to plan based on that assumption.

All tests are currently expensive (at the time I am writing this, it seems like $40/test is the cheap end of things for PCR; I expect this to continue to drop).

Price can be reduced by pooling samples.

The negative experience of testing (desire for “painless”) can be addressed by testing waste or saliva, instead of swab based tests.

Accuracy is going to take some time for the science to improve; we can plan based on current accuracy and price points and assume that in the fall, the accuracy will be better AND the price will be lower. As long as we do not plan for a particular degree of improvement, we can be certain those surprises will be good ones.

Given the woeful shortfall between what we want from testing and what we have currently, and the total uncertainty associated with what might be possible with testing in the future, I think it is worth taking a step back and considering what purpose is served by testing.

Most kids, most of the time, are pretty awesomely compliant. Some ages have characteristic non-compliance (“terrible twos”, also, middle schoolers). All ages have a few kids that really struggle with school compliance demands. These kids wind up with extra parent-teacher conferences, 504s, IEPs, in special classrooms, in special schools and, alas, sometimes in correctional facilities. They collect diagnoses (ADD, hyperactivity, ADHD, ODD etc.). They collect medication. They are (among) the targets of truancy enforcement systems.

Because we have such poor data right now, it is basically impossible to know how this group of kids is doing with distance learning. We do not know as a group. We do not know as subgroups. Anecdotally, a lot of this group of kids is basically not showing up to do the distance learning work at all, and we do not have any kind of meaningful truancy enforcement system for distance learning.

I think we can safely say that teachers have a lot of sharp memories of this group of kids from the Before Times. And those kids are feared even more now, because any possibility of a safe return to school requires additional compliance (or at least, that is what we are all currently thinking, who knows what tomorrow might bring!). There are lots of stories from before the shutdowns of kids coughing on each other and on teachers intentionally, and there are stories in Sweden of it happening currently. While some of this is surely urban legend, these stories are appearing in enough detail in enough news outlets that it is reasonable to believe that it is happening (I mean, come on, people did that Tide Pod thing). More importantly, fear of it happening will prevent teachers from returning. At least some teachers, in at least some schools.

In case it was not obvious, but THE SAME KIDS that teachers believe need to be in school in order to not regress / make any progress are THE SAME KIDS that teachers most fear being in school.

It is plausible to further conclude that these may well be THE SAME KIDS that have the least effective supervision at home and whose parents most want them back in school.

Teachers demand that they go back. Teachers demand that they not be at risk from them when they do.

I will (tentatively) call this The Behavioral Kid Conundrum

I am going to be doing a fair amount of posting about Education / Planning for the Fall. I apologize! First, this is going to be an unholy amount of words. Second, it is all going to be wrong and, probably, irrelevant, possibly within days.

I will attempt to label every post on this top EPftF. Hopefully, that will make you giggle. Also, you can more easily avoid those posts.

ETAYA: I want to be super clear here. This is all very rough draft. The reason I have not linked to articles I mention in the posts is because I was too busy dumping what was frothing around in my brain out to be bothered to go track down the links. I may or may not go back and fix that later. Along with what I am sure are other boneheaded lapses of thought, argument, factual errors, etc.

ETA: The Posts So Far

Behavior Kids Conundrum. Or Synecdoche.

Testing Characteristics

Testing Purposes

Interpreting Testing

Despair

Acceptance of Reality and Flexible Commitment

In Person Schooling

Putting It All Together

Profile

Nella Acceber

Nella's Very Old Fashioned Website

June 2025

S	M	T	W	T	F	S
1	2	3	4	5	6	7
8	9	10	11	12	13	14
15	16	17	18	19	20	21
22	23	24	25	26	27	28
29	30

Syndicate

Page Summary

It Has Been 40 Days Since I Wrote EPftF
Absenteeism and distance learning link fu
EPftF: Putting It All Together
EPftF: In Person Schooling
EPftF: Acceptance of Reality and Flexible Commitment
EPftF: Despair
EPftF: Interpreting Testing
EPftF: Testing Purposes
EPftF: Testing Characteristics
EPftF: behavior problems
Upcoming posts: Administrivia

Active Entries

Style Credit

Style: Adjustable Gradient for Bannering by branchandroot

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags

Page generated Jun. 14th, 2025 08:31 am

Transplanting a Seattleite

Middle Aged in Middlesex

Entries tagged with epftf

It Has Been 40 Days Since I Wrote EPftF

Absenteeism and distance learning link fu

EPftF: Putting It All Together

EPftF: In Person Schooling

EPftF: Acceptance of Reality and Flexible Commitment

EPftF: Despair

EPftF: Interpreting Testing

EPftF: Testing Purposes

EPftF: Testing Characteristics

EPftF: behavior problems

Upcoming posts: Administrivia