PILOTed

What have we learned during Covid?

Covid didn’t change directions and it isn’t just a temporary disruption; it just sped up things that were going to happen anyway – Arthur Levine president of the Woodrow Wilson National Fellowship Foundation

First, we cannot unsee issues that became glaringly obvious during the pandemic:

• Uninspiring curriculum and pedagogies
• Technology deserts preventing millions from participating in online interactions that should be routine and time-saving
• Inconsistency of school and teacher quality
• Teacher and substitute shortages partly due to teacher burnout from high demands, bureaucratic burdens, and lack of positive rewards
• Meaningless high stakes assessments that stultify innovation and lock in bad practice
• Lack of flexible childcare
• Disconnect between the cost of higher education and the perceived benefits of higher education
• Gaps between jobs needed by employers and society, skills of the workforce, and live-able wage
• Anger between segments of society feeling stressed and other segments who they saw as resisting actions that would relieve their stress
• Budget shortfalls in schools (including universities) resulting in difficult decisions about where to impose cuts
• Inequity, real gains where children had resources and support structures and substantial losses where they did not that exacerbate demographic, regional, and racial inequities

On the plus side, we’ve seen many potentials to dramatically improve the ways we learn and teach:

• Live web meeting platforms for synchronous interactions so that people do not have to be in the same place at the same time in order to learn from each other
• Augmented Reality and Virtual Reality to provide immersive experiences and simulations of scenarios that are impractical in real life
• Multi-media sources to provide a continuum of learning across news sources, research, social media, blog posts, podcasts, documentaries, conferences, and virtual conferences
• Artificial intelligence to create completely personalized learning
• Simulations, games, and technology assistance to embed learning into whatever people are doing or like doing
• Blockchain to maintain a distributed ledger to represent each person’s accomplishments, skills, and knowledge
• Mobile Technologies, and 5G specifically, to connect at high speeds to anything, any time, and practically anywhere.
• The ultimate triumph of a concerted effort that created solutions (new vaccines) in record time, which may model ways to solve some of these other issues

What have you learned from Covid; and where do you see that taking education?

The teachers' perspective on the pandemic

I was lucky to virtually meet David Lundie during an online event sponsored by the RSA. David recently completed a study on 700 teachers’ responses to the pandemic. The research was conducted in the UK (for you Americans, that means England, Scotland, and Wales) and, based on my informal talks with teachers here in the US and India, seems reflective of teachers around the world.

Some highlights from the data:

• While the social effects of the pandemic are widespread they are particularly acute in underserved communities. While almost 40% of teachers expect many more children to be labelled at risk or face interventions for social services by the end of the lockdown, 68.4% of the teachers serving underprivileged communities have those concerns. While only 5% of teachers in richer schools feel that their children are at physical risk, 63% of teachers in the most deprived quintile believe their students may be at risk. While over 85% of teachers serving the lowest economic quintile students feel their students are not getting physical activity and stimulation, only about 5.2% of those serving the upper quintiles feel that way about their students, and 56% of the teachers of the underprivileged expect their students to be malnourished while only 2.6% of the teachers of the more privileged students expect malnutrition to be a factor.
• Only about 28% of teachers feel they are able to provide the mental health support their kids need, and fewer than 40% feel their schools will offer the support needed when the children return. Virtually all believe that more support will be needed when children return full time to the buildings.
• Most teaches feel that schools will need to rebalance priorities away from test results and more toward student well-being. Over 90% of teachers hope that education will become less target-driven and more humane.
• Three quarters of teachers are concerned about their own health and safety when returning to school regardless of assurances by the government, given that they will probably return before the virus is completely defeated.
• Teachers expect that most of the first quarter back will be devoted to re-establishing behavioral norms and routines, thus with reduced time and effort available for “normal” learning activities. Almost 90% expect that students will have more difficulty regulating their behavior and attention, and almost 80% feel that schools will not be equipped to help them with their students’ resultant traumas. Ninety percent of teachers feel that part of their job upon return will be to “prepare my students for a world in which they will get to re-evaluate many of the things we have taken for granted about how we treat the environment and one another.”
• Three quarters of the teaches agreed that many of their students are having chaotic home lives during the pandemic, and about two-thirds feel that many of their students’ parents will be unemployed by the end of the lockdown.
• Interestingly, only about a quarter of teachers are finding that students are developing a greater self-reliance during the pandemic. I would have expected this to be closer to three –quarters, but I guess that’s not what teachers are experiencing with their students.
• Eighty percent of teachers feel that their high attaining students are adapting to online learning, while just 3% feel that their low attaining students are.
• Ninety percent of teachers feel that the pandemic has given parents a greater understanding of what teachers do, and that schools now have a chance to “re-evaluate some outdated practices and modernize what it means to be a teacher.”

Some of the recommendations:

• System-wide and school-wide planning for kids’ social and emotional needs, providing resources for the children and tools for the teachers to meet these needs.
• Special attention for students coming from the lowest economic quintiles, and significantly extra resources for schools that primarily serve that population addressing mental and physical health and wellness
• Provide online opportunities to the students who have adapted well to online learning while providing more human to human support for those who have not adapted.
• Schools systems and schools take the opportunity to implement practices and innovations (including but not limited to technology) that support and prepare young people for the societal and economic challenges of the future, while discarding those that do not, especially those that have been solely continued because of inertia or “that’s the way we’ve always done it.”

Some Interesting Trends and Occurrences

I was in a very spirited discussion this week about changes that cities and society are undergoing or will need to undergo.

Almost half of all adults today do some freelancing or work for themselves at least some of the time. This changes the nature of work, leisure, and works and residential spaces.

Fifty years ago, there were only two cities with more than 10 million population. Today, there are 30; 6 are in China and 5 are in India. There are about 4 billion people living in cities today, projected to grow to 7 billion by 2050, which should be about 70% of the world’s population.

Costs of housing are increasing 3x as fast as family income, and trends seem to point toward cities becoming places of systemic unsustainable inequality. Supporting this is the average “home” size in cities has shrunk by about 15% over the last ten years. In fact, given that about ¼ of urban dwellers in Europe fled from crowded cities to ride out the pandemic in suburban or rural areas, and “health or weather crises” seem to be on the increase, there is a possibility that projections calling for huge growth in cities might be mitigated by the inability of cities to adapt to rapid change or chaotic crises.

The traditional family of 2 adults with children is breaking down, and there are different models of supporting individuals and families that are emerging or will emerge.

Space10, a think tank created by Ikea founder Kaav Pour, projects that based on current trends of population and consumption growth, by 2050 we will need 3 earths to sustain the population.

One outcome of all these trends is an exploding interest in shared living or co-living arrangements, where there are some of the living space is private (like possibly bedrooms), others are shared (such as kitchens), and some services may be shared (like childcare). If you think about it, coliving spaces are more efficient than individual living, as many services and spaces are primarily unused most of the time, and can be efficiently shared.

The Covid pandemic has also changed the calculus for sharing spaces and services. Office space demand has shrunk in urban centers, some of which may be convertible to residential shared environments. Child care and home-based education demands have mushroomed, opening up more possibilities for sharing responsibilities. Working from home has become more prevalent.

The age group most often targeted currently is millennials, many of whom have been priced out of the market for owning, or even renting, their own places. Developers are enticed by the possibilities of fitting more people in less space, at a lower cost, but still providing an acceptable living experience.

Retirees are another group that is being enticed into shared experience communities, where recreation, healthcare, and some basic services can be shared.

Two of the hurdles facing the expansion of co-living facilities are 1) that people often associate these spaces with Spartan college dorm-type experiences, which no adult wants, and 2) that the shared spaces are dependent on fostering a sense of community, where people want to live and be together, which is very complicated to engineer.

Are you ready for a successful year?

Are you ready for a successful year?

The test of a sailor is not when seas are calm and the wind is steady.

We are not in a fairy tale, no superhero is going to make everything turn out all right, and 2021 is not “happily ever after”.

It’s up to us.

Here is a 12 question quiz to see if you are ready; Can you keep your eye on the goal and keep moving to a successful 2021? Each of these is a yes/no question. When you are finished, tally up your score.

1. When the media reports the number of coronavirus cases continues to rise as does the number of deaths, are going to keep your resolve to do what you can to keep yourself and others healthy and maintain your poise instead of reacting in outrage, anger, or resignation?
2. When unemployment rises during the year, and it doesn’t seem that the government is doing what it can, will you understand that solutions take time, possibly even a year or more, and that no path to financial stability is a straight line?
3. When violence erupts, and everyone seems to be saying our society is cracking and calling for some immediate reaction, like new laws or use of greater force, are you going to let things settle for a week or so before rushing to advocate some short term solution that could have long term unintended and unforeseen consequences?
4. When the powerless or defenseless are ignored, punished, or discriminated against, are you going to call it out even if it’s a group, race, ethnicity, class, or religion that you are not a member of?
5. When you see something on media or social media that starts to make your blood boil, are you going to say to yourself, this was purposely placed here to make me lose my poise and get me angry, it’s most likely a very biased very small slice of what actually happened, and I’m not going to let it affect me that way?
6. When your group advocates a strategy or tactic as the only one that will work, or advocates waiting until there is one that has been proven to work, are you going to keep in mind that no one really knows the best strategies or solutions for complex problems and remain open to workable alternatives?
7. Are you willing to regard setbacks, even big setbacks, as valuable information, rather than omens of impending doom?
8. Are you going to focus on building a better future together instead of complaining about the past or tearing down anyone who proposes other solutions?
9. Are you willing to work with people who have violently disagreed with you if it means accomplishing common goals?
10. Are you willing to recognize that often there a multiple strategies or tactics that could work and that sometimes it’s more important to start doing something, even if it rules out the course of action you favor?
11. Are you going to verify information, even if seems to come from a credible source, before accepting a premise that supports your existing point of view or dismissing one that contradicts one of your beliefs?
12. Are you going to take time every day to be mindful of the blessings of life?

How did you score?

Do you have 12 yesses? If not, go back through each question and rethink your answer.

When you have 12 yes answers, you are the sailor who is ready for whatever winds and storms 2021 throws at you.

Remember your answers.

 

My hopes for the Department of #Education for 2021

Focus

The purpose of education should be to give all children a leg up, to help them prepare to be adults who can contribute to their families and communities and to live fulfilling lives. I hope that the new Department of Education keeps this mission forefront, that it fully understands that the only purpose of tests and assessments is to further those goals, and that test scores are not goals in and of themselves.

Equity

While we've known for a long time that opportunities, and educational opportunity and access, are unevenly divided, this become especially apparent during this last year. Let's work toward giving each child access to a quality education and the resources to take advantage of education opportunities.

Wellbeing

Administrators cannot administer, educators cannot educate, and children cannot learn when they are consumed by fear and anxiety. We all need times to reflect, plan, relax, and interconnect. Let's work toward making our education institutions welcoming to the whole person, not factories that use teachers as machines attempting to cram knowledge into the brains of recalcitrant students.

Wouldn't it be wonderful if the new US Department of Education leadership can focus on developing children into well adapted adults, providing ample opportunities and resources to all students, and tapping into the humanity of all education stakeholders in 2021?

Why Teach Empathy?

This is a guest post by Lisa Parisi, and was originally published on her blog Lisa's Lingo. On October 25, Lisa is going to be leading an online discussion How I Spent 35 Years Teaching Children to Respect Each Other Even When They Disliked Each Other, and you can participate by registering here.

Somebody posted a picture on FaceBook that listed what children today are learning from the President of the United States. You may or may not agree with the list, but you have to admit something is wrong in this world.

Parents and teachers spend lifetimes teaching children about empathy. Some do better than others. Some actively try, while others hope to lead by example. All of us fail at times.

Today, it is clear to me that empathy is sorely lacking in the world. From the President of the United States and leaders of other countries, to protestors, rioters, members of the House of Representatives and Members of the Senate to store and restaurant employees and customers. Lack of empathy and respect is running rampant. Open your news feed on any given day and you will see government representatives being rude to each other, to constituents, and to the media. You will see examples of "Karens" all over the world (I'm not going to even get into the idea of a "Karen" as being rude. It is and I'm sorry for all you women out there whose real name is Karen.). You will see examples of car accidents caused by disrespect and lack of empathy for other drivers. You will see companies laying waste to huge areas of land and water, with no respect for any living being already there.

I truly believe it is the job of educators to actively teach children empathy. It is not enough to just lead by example. It hasn't worked up to now. Probably because a school, by its very nature, promotes a lack of empathy. Let me explain.

• How many times have you told a child to stop talking to a classmate, only to find out he was only trying to help a friend understand the assignment better?
• How often have you held a competition in your classroom, cheering for the winner, while hoping the loser doesn't start to cry and ruin all the fun?
• How many times have you told your students they could not work together on this assignment, because you knew it would mean either someone was left working alone or one person would do all the work, while the other watched and did nothing?
• How many times did you tell your students not to talk in the hallway and then you started a conversation with a passing teacher?
• How often did you work with your students to win the "Class of the Week" award for highest grades, best attendance, quietest behavior - cheering when you won or booing when another class won?

I could go on and on. Each of these examples is commonplace and begs for a lesson in empathy. But who has time? I believe we must make the time. It is imperative for the good of our world. We have lost the ability to lift others up, to care for the environment, to listen to those who have differing opinions. We need to reinforce the idea that empathy and respect are necessary and useful for advancement in a society.

I remember Albert. He was a fifth grade student of mine who was classified as learning disabled. He had a language delay, so explaining himself was quite difficult. And he had a family that encouraged him to never take responsibility for anything. They believed he was always right, the other children were always wrong, and the teachers did not understand him at all. He struggled constantly with the other children, fighting over books, over favorite seats, over playground toys. He argued with teachers over whether or not work should be done, was done, was handed in. He made the year quite a challenge.

I spent all year working with Albert on communication. How can you explain to Johnny why you are upset, without using your fists? How can you show me you need help, without ripping up your work? How can you solve a problem, without calling in Dad to solve it for you?

What I didn't do with Albert was successfully teach him the fifth grade curriculum. He didn't improve much in reading or math, he didn't complete projects in social studies or science, he didn't willingly participate in morning meetings or group skype calls or, really, anything we did in class. I failed as a teacher. Until one day...

Albert came back from recess, upset with another child about an issue on the playground. He wanted to punch the other child. I was able to prevent that and, after talking with him and the other child, I discovered that Albert had a right to be angry. Normally, he was the bully, taking away toys and pushing kids down. This time, though, he was playing with a basketball and the other child grabbed it from him and refused to let him play. If I had just gone along with the day, I would have punished Albert. After all, it was usually his fault that a fight was brewing. But I took the time to listen, learn, and teach.

I told Albert he had a right to be angry but not a right to hit. I helped him use his words to explain his position to the other child. The other child apologized and told Albert that the next day, they would play basketball together. And they did.

I would love to tell you that Albert changed completely, became a top student and a calm child. But he didn't. He struggled all year with explaining himself. The other children, however, saw a different side of him and helped him stay calm during a crisis. And two years later, while I was visiting the middle school, I saw Albert in the hallway. He came right up to me, shook my hand, looked me in the eye, and said, "Hello, Mrs. Parisi. It's so good to see you. How are you?" This was monumental.

Why do I tell this story? Albert will probably never be a mover and shaker of the world. He will probably have to work every day to keep his family from "saving him from the world." And he might still struggle with reading and writing and math. But maybe, just maybe, he won't go to a rally and start a fight. Maybe he won't walk into a store and berate the cashier for making a mistake. Maybe he will get married and treat his wife with respect and kindness. Maybe. And maybe, if we spend more time actively teaching empathy, spend more time dealing with situations instead of reacting to them, spend more time teaching children how to listen to each other and care about each other, the world will be a better place. And we really need the world to be a better place.

Please register for Lisa's discussion on October 25 or if you are reading this after that date, you can check out the archives.

A Quick Question About the Future of #Education

I was having an interesting discussion with some Scottish educators during the Creative Bravery festival about different ways to teach. One of the topics resulted in the recent post Should We Let Pedagogy Die?. The other topic has taken a bit longer to percolate.

One of the educators suggested that practically anything can be reduced to a 2x2 grid, and that when you are considering how to teach or how to learn something, we should consider that on one axis would be: do we have the capacity (knowledge, skills, and resources) to solve something, and on the other axis should be is there a clear solution. It might look something like this:

If a person has the knowledge and skills, and there is a clear solution, then all that’s necessary to teach is perhaps reference material for refresher. If you know how to drive and follow a map, then all you need is some reference material on the route to your destination. If you know the material you need to take a test, then maybe all you need is some study aids to prepare for the test.

If there is a clear solution and a person does not have the knowledge or skills, teaching and learning should be pretty straightforward. Cover the material the person needs to learn. There is an end of year math skills test, cover the material needed for the test during the year in a way that the person will be able to do well on the test. If a person has to demonstrate competence in some science concepts, teach those science concepts.

The more interesting cases, and probably more common in life, are the cases where there is no clear solution.

What if a person has the general knowledge and skills, but there is no clear solution? What would you want that person to learn, and how would they learn it? Maybe learning different problem solving methods would be a start.

What if we wanted people to be prepared to solve problems where we don’t know today what the problems will be, we do not know the specific knowledge and skills they will need to solve those problems, and, in all likelihood there is no clear solution to the problem?

Isn’t that fourth quadrant what today’s children face with their futures?

Most of us would acknowledge that our current education system doesn’t do that well.

Here is the quick question about the future of education: What should we do about that?

I don’t have an answer, but I’d love to hear yours.

And, you could advance your understanding of potential solutions in future or archived (free) Edchat Interactives.

Should We Let Pedagogy Die?

Pedagogy is the way we teach kids.

Pedagogy focuses on the methods that bring content to students effectively so that they learn it.

In 1980 Malcolm Knowles acknowledged that pedagogy was not enough when we wanted adults to learn:

1. Adults need to have agency in their instruction.
2. Adults need to be able to try things and make mistakes.
3. Adults need to see the relevance of instruction.
4. Adult learning should be about solving problems not providing information.

He coined the term Androgogy for the methods used so that adults can learn. Don’t these apply to children? Do you think children learn better when they have agency, create and learn by doing, need to see relevance, and learn while solving problems they care about?

In the last few years, learning scientists are starting to realize that even Androgogy may not go far enough.

Heutogogy is self determined learning.

In Pedagogy, what and how you learn is determined for you. In Androgogy, what and how you lean is determined with you. In Heutogogy what and how you learn is determined by you.

Pedagogy is thus a top-down approach. Creating a great textbook or an effective lecture are examples of Pedagogy.

Androgogy is a joint approach to learning, with an authority guiding and nudging a learner. Problem-based learning is often Androgogy, often with an instructor selecting certain aspects of projects, and working with the learner(s) to select other aspects.

Heutogogy is learner driven. The learner may research content, and may consult and be guided by experts. But what to learn and what to do are ultimately decided by the learner herself.

There are a growing number of instances where Heutogogy has been deployed. Here are two.

Elinor Vettraino is Programme Director and Head Coach at Aston University in Scotland. In the UK, University is three years. In her program, year one students come in, and she tells them, you are going to form groups of 4-6 students. Each group is responsible for creating a sustainable business. In operating and sustaining the business your group needs to determine what you want to learn from your three years here, and you all are responsible for making sure each of you learns what you came her for. The financial goal for the business is to pay for the group to take a six-month around the world trip at the end of the three years. Dr. Vettraino is one of the founders of the online Team Learning Community which is a community of practice to support this type of learning worldwide.

Don Wettrick is an educator in Indianapolis. He has been teaching using heutogical methods in high school. On day one, students come into his class. He shows them the learning standards that Indiana requires for the course. He then instructs the students: Here is what the state is requiring you to learn this year. In the next day come up with a project that will benefit the school or community that will start teaching you at least some of these standards. On Friday, you will have a chance to present to me what you will be attempting, what it will teach you, and how you will assess whether you have learned it. Let me know if you have any questions. As the year progresses, the projects become more ambitious. If you want to find out what his students have done, or, even  better, if you want to support his students, take a look at his website STARTedUp.

Androgogy and Heutogogy are two learning models with demonstrably better outcomes than the didactic pedagogy we routinely apply. Isn’t it time we put pedagogy out to pasture?

Thank you Creative Bravery Festival for introducing me to Dr. Vettraino and reintroducing me to Heutogogy. Image was developed by Dr. Vettraino.

A Different Perspective on College

As a society, we’ve developed a collective vision about college:

College is the gateway to a good life and a good career; every person should have the opportunity to go to college; it’s not just about preparing people for jobs, it prepares people to think; while college isn’t for everyone, and some people are not capable of college work or perhaps have other interests, every person should have the opportunity to go to college.

This is the story we tell ourselves when we say, “everyone should be able to go to college” or “we need more college graduates” or even “college should be free for everyone.”

This perspective looks down on anyone without a college degree: they couldn’t cut it, they weren’t smart enough, they settled for something less, they dropped out, etc. There is a moral and social value to going to college, you are a “better” person if you went to college, and even better if you went to graduate school. Those who didn’t are less able, and, unless there are some extraordinary circumstances, are lower.

Here’s another perspective.

College gives people who have had the luxury of not having had to make decisions for themselves, or living with the consequences of their choices and decisions, the additional luxury of spending about 4 years responsible for nothing more than taking care of their own needs and getting social and intellectual stimulation; and, while they are at it, they can pick up a few work related skills and get a diploma that commences their lives as adults. College is a place to send 18-year olds who have not grown up yet. If they are lucky and graduate from an elite college, they will also have an initial advantage in competing for high paying white collar occupations.

In this scenario, if you already know how to think for yourself and are ready for responsibility, you don’t need four years of college to start being an adult. You need the opportunity and probably some job skills to get your life started. Some of those skills can be acquired by living, others while working, some require additional education and training, and some require a lot of additional education and training. The amount of education required is just dependent on the life and occupation paths you choose, and most do not require a 2-year or 4-year degree. For some, college like a pre-adult summer camp, enjoyable and a place to mature, but that doesn’t make them better than anyone else.

Scenario 2 may be a healthier perspective for society.

Scenario 2 recognizes that college and university are means to some ends, but not for most; that there is no moral value in being a college graduate; your value is the way you live your life. College is just a pathway; it can be helpful to get to some destinations, it can be used as a transition to adult-hood for those who need it or who want it, but college is just one choice that may or may not be helpful depending on what an individual wants to do and what that individual needs.

Where do you think college fits?

Data based Covid decision making.

We are all concerned about both the effects of distancing during the Covid threat and the effects of keeping society, the economy, and schools closed.

We’re in new territory. No one knows the answers, and we are all justifiably concerned about the positive and negative aspects of practically any course of action we take.

I thought I would try to quantify the difference of deaths in opening vs keeping society closed, and so I made up a spreadsheet that takes some educated guesses and compares deaths based on opening society, the economy, and schools as opposed to keeping the economy and schools mostly closed.

Currently the US has a population of roughly 330 million. Of those who catch Covid, about 4% become seriously ill and currently about ½ of 1% die. And we also know that about 80% of those who die are over 60 years old.

If we fully open society, and roughly half the population catches Covid, we should expect that about 825,000 people will die. That’s 0.25% of our population. Of those who die, if 80% are over 60, then about 660,000 people over 60 will die, which is just under 1% of the over 60 population. Those over 60 who catch Covid will have just under a 2% chance of dying (1.76% in this simulation).

	Open Economy	Closed Economy
Total Population	330,000,000	330,000,000
People not infected	165,000,000	297,000,000
Infected, not serious	157,575,000	31,515,000
Seriously ill, but live	6,600,000	1,320,000
Number of people who die	825,000	165,000
Over 60 population	75,000,000	75,000,000
Over 60, not infected	37,500,000	67,500,000
Over 60 Infected, but live	36,840,000	7,467,000
Number of Over 60 who die	660,000	132,000

We can’t compare this to zero, because even if we try to shut things down, some people will still catch the disease. If we said that instead of 50%, just 10% catch the disease if we shut down, then instead of 825,000 deaths, there will be 165,000. Those are big numbers, but it means that instead of 0.25% of the population dying, 0.05% will; both very small percentages.

Here is a link to the spreadsheet with assumptions. You can copy it to your own drive or download it to your computer if you want to play with your own assumptions.

No one wants to sentence innocent people to death, but I can see reasonable people disagreeing on the extent of shutdown based on these figures. Some will say that losing ¼ of 1% of the population is a reasonable price to pay for the benefits of being  able to socialize, work and learn face to face.

Others can point out that 825,000 people is too high a price, and we should wait a year until we have a vaccine. Some might focus on at-risk groups, that losing almost 1% of our over 60 population is especially steep, and suggest less stringent policies and procedures that protect those who are most vulnerable.

Some will say that assuming 50% will contract Covid is too high, or two low. Anyone can point out that there are other groups at risk, those with respiratory issues, or that the risks more often fall on the poor or on people of color, and so we shouldn’t be talking just about aggregate numbers or only segmenting out those over 60.

There are a lot of trade-offs. People are going to die, and people are going to die from Covid no matter what action we take. Having an idea of the numbers of people involved should make for better decision making than not having plausible dat. It then boils down to what tradeoffs of deaths vs benefits of opening, closing, or something in between are you comfortable making.