To think this school's plan won't work

[Poppi89]

I work in a secondary school ( not as a teacher) and we have been kept up to date by email and zoom staff meetings.

There has been a lot of talk of when we will re-open and what will happen as like most schools it was very stressful closing the school and not being prepared so they are trying to put plans in place and keep one step ahead.

Due to a lot of parents in the area wanting the school to re-open and for life to go back to 'normal' they think the government might re-open schools sooner rather than later maybe before May half term, so the school has put in place an outline of what will happen:

• School will re-open but will continue sticking to the guidelines of social distancing - as this is not possible in a school with full capacity students will be split into halves or thirds to ensure they are spaced far enough away from each other. This means that the kids will only be in 1/2 days a week.

• Due to adults spreading the virus more than children (it seems) they don't think all staff should be in each day. So will be depending on parents to do a rota system - so one qualified member of staff to 2 parents to supervise.

Does anybody else think the school would be better to remain closed if this is the case?
It seems they won't be learning much and the risk of getting the virus will still be high.

I do get that this is the best plan they have come up with to keep everyone happy. My DD is missing her friends and wouldn't mind going back to school a couple of days a week and I guess it will be easier for parents to get back to work but I would rather wait until June/July at the earliest as surely the NHS is still overwhelmed.

What do you guys think?
AIBU - thinking this isn't a good plan

People are stating the actual rules for the benefit of those who do not know them.

People without a DBS can be volunteers in school, or on a school outing with children after a risk assessment and while continually supervised.

I’m imagining the administration and staff effort required to manage a volunteer rota based on 2 hour slots. Cover in schools is hard enough on a normal day.

I should have changed my name before posting or maybe not posted a 'plan' that I didn't have full facts on as I can see why people want questions but I just can't answer some.

I appreciate people putting up the rules, sharing their experiences etc

I just wanted to give a break down on my view of the volunteers as people kept asking or implying I was lying because of the DBS check.

For me personally the DBS check is not that important as it doesn't mean those people are unsafe - we all remember victims like Sarah and Jessica.
But I do understand the worry of some parents who would feel more comfortable knowing people have had DBS checks - just to reassure people I have never known anyone without a DBS check to be left alone with a child (even those with DBS checks tend to not be alone in a room one-on-one to protect themselves).

I’d appreciate an apology for a personal attack but apparently it’s not going to happen so I’ll report it.

As this thread has gone on it feels increasingly like pushing the idea of volunteering with very little thought as to what the volunteers will do.

@Poppi89
For me personally the DBS check is not that important as it doesn't mean those people are unsafe - we all remember victims like Sarah and Jessica.

Seriously? I mean, really?

It is precisely BECAUSE of horrific cases like these that schools, colleges, scouts, brownies, playgroups, elderly carers, mental health workers TO NAME ONLY A FRACTION OF THE ORGANISATIONS WHICH RELY ON PAID AND VOLUNTARY WORKERS absolutely insist on RIGOROUS DBS clearance for people in contact with vulnerable children and adults, or ensure that volunteers and even paid employees without DBS are NEVER left alone with them.

Any parent who is aware of the DBS system but says that they aren't important - never mind someone who claims to be employed at a school - frankly shouldn't be in school at all.

Arguably a clear DBS only proves that a person has not got a record of anything untoward. And volunteers without one are very, very unlikely to be a risk to children.

But for fucks sake op - you might be non-teaching staff in your school but you surely have some level of safeguarding training to recognise the importance of stuff like this.

I think your thread has lost any semblance of integrity now.

@Poppi89 if your head is relying on your professional input for a return to learning plan I shudder to think what your SLT is like and dispair for the students, I really do.

For me personally the DBS check is not that important as it doesn't mean those people are unsafe - we all remember victims like Sarah and Jessica.

Eh? By Sarah and Jessica do you mean Holly and Jessica who are the very reason that these tests now exist?

Wow I literally can't say anything without people turning it around!

I was saying I understand why posters would be upset that those without DBS checks are allowed in school and wanted to reassure them their kids are not at risk. - lots of people obviously did not know this so I didn't want them worrying when their kids go back to normal.

I have apologised at least 3 times if I have been defensive on something that wasn't aimed at me, or if someone said my plan referring to THE plan.

It just proves that some posters are out to have an argument regardless of the context. I literally cannot say anything even though everyone is agreeing with my OP - somehow I am still being attacked!

@MHNQ - please can you delete this thread.

If everyone can report this to get it removed please I have emailed them but not had a reply yet.

I won't put up with continuously being called a liar, a fake etc and then still get abuse even after apologising without taking it as a personal attack.

@poppi89 I'm not attacking you but you are really putting yourself out there by saying DBS isn't important to you. Safeguarding is at the absolute core of your own workplace and spouting that it doesn't matter to reassure others is horrifying!

Any head worth their salt will not open their school despite the dates the government set IF IT IS NOT SAFE TO DO SO. They will not ask parent volunteers to babysit kids, nor help them cross roads, leave them with access to students records, even sharpen pencils without proper safeguarding procedures in place, DBS or not.

I am not pushing the idea of volunteering - I am AGAINST the idea!!!

What I am saying is that volunteers do exist - but that somehow makes me a liar

My issue with the 'plan' is not the issue of volunteers because they are not DBS checked - it's the issue that if you don't have enough staff then the school shouldn't re-open. - If you don't agree with me then that's fine but people are saying I am lying because no-one can ever enter a school without a DBS. But then I realised people might worry at the thought of this so tried to reassure them - I shouldn't have in hindsight but I was trying to be nice.

FlamingoAndJohn sorry Sarah and Holly

@Poppi89 If a parent is likely to be left alone with a child (or children) as part of a regular duty then they have to have a DBS check. I used to be a parent reader in my DS's primary school each week - as I was reading with each child alone I had to have a DBS check.

I have one now as I work for a school - a secondary one - and sometimes have one to one or one to a group contact.

If a parent is not going to be in sole charge of a group then I can't see how your school's plan (I understand it's not yours) can work. Who will be in charge of the class? Because if a teacher is hovering between classrooms - i.e. supervising what is going on in two or three classes - then that means another adult is in charge of a class on their own at some point.

Unless the parent helper is only there to act as an unpaid and unqualified TA, i.e only in class when a DBS checked supervisor of some description is present, it counts as regular unsupervised access to children. If the teacher has to leave the classroom they need to ensure the parent isn't left alone if they aren't DBS checked.

The reason parents helping at outings don't need a DBS check is to do with the regularity of their help. A once or twice a year help is very different to helping for 30 minutes every Monday or all day on Friday every week. The regularity clause is 3 times or more each month I believe. It's that regularity that allows grooming to take place if there's no direct supervision and that's what a DBS is first line of defence in.

I used to be a safeguarding officer for our local church and, as a church, if I didn't get a DBS done on someone who needed it we would be up do-dah creek if that person abused a child or vulnerable person. The same would apply to a school and I'm a bit surprised the safeguarding officer for the school hasn't spoken up about that. I'm also a bit surprised the safeguarding officer hasn't worked out ways to ensure there is limited opportunities for allegations against volunteers. Safeguarding works both ways and, if I'm reading this as a parent being left alone with the children, they're potentially wide open to allegations.

That's what people are trying to say. I'm in total agreement with you. The idea of a parent army of volunteers seems great but has so many potential holes that need to be discussed and a DBS requirement is just the tip of the iceberg.

I honestly don't know the ins and outs of it - I assume the parent would be there with a member of staff who isn't a teacher but is still DBS checked.

I was also thinking that to make it fair (as this is what happened at my DDs school) was that each parent helper only came in once and not a regular occurrence so would not need a DBS check. I didn't think about your idea that they may have a select few who would come in regularly which would, of course, have to be DBS checked but if that's the case they would probably just hire them. I may actually suggest this.

I have a DBS and I am told constantly never to be alone with a child to protect yourself. So they definitely would never have a parent alone.

Poppi89

It’s not to protect the parent that they wouldn’t be alone with children it’s because no DBS - no alone. Ever. I don’t understand why you don’t know this, it’s covered in basic safeguarding training.

It is for both - the DBS is to protect the child but no member of staff should ever be alone with a child. If they need to speak to you in private you are told you need to ask another member of staff to come in or open a door so other staff are aware.

If you go into work at any school they will tell you to protect yourself and not put yourself into a situation that would mean a child says something false about you.

Why does a secondary school have to have supervised school crossings? Surely the pupils can cross the road on their own? And Poppi89 many people have RTFT but because you seem to be trying to argue both sides of the post people are understandably confused as to what point you are actually making. Also lots of posters can't make sense of what you are saying the school is suggesting or why one-third of pupils plus a reduced number of teachers will seemingly require so much volunteering from parents. And finally, some people don't believe you because what seems to happen in your school (or in your personal family experience) with non DBS checked parents on trips etc is so at variance with happens in most schools.

My school is on a busy road and we've had at least 3 accidents since I've been there.

My point I am making is what I said in my OP - that I don't agree. I am arguing with people who say things like 'schools would never ask for volunteers' when they do. Or that 'no-one is allowed through the door unless they have a DBS' which they also do.

I don't know why - they just said due to the ratio of number of staff to pupils they are thinking of asking parents to volunteer. I literally don't know the numbers. There is over 1000 pupils so its not a small school and I don't know how many staff would be deemed at risk.

Non-DBS parents on school trips etc is 100% a thing and if you have DC or know anyone with DC they would have been asked to volunteer. - I honestly don't know why people would think I would lie about this. They are always after parent helpers. It is less when they get to secondary school but not unusual as my school asked parent volunteers to help paint a stage ready for a play. Other posters have come forward and said they've done these without a DBS check too.

The problem is, you need one teacher per room of children. Having loads of surplus volunteers who can’t be left alone with kids won’t help open schools-it just increases chances of transmission.

I would have thought supply teachers would be a far better idea.

Schools are usually very keen to enlist parent helpers, especially if you’re able to commit to going into school regularly. Often, teachers will ask for people to express their interest in volunteering at the start of the school year, and will then allocate people to the positions that need filling. If, for instance, you’re available every Wednesday afternoon, you might be asked to become a regular reading helper. This may need to be agreed by the headteacher first.

The issue of safety checks for school helpers is a grey area. Current policy states that volunteers don’t need any special checks if:

• They’re supervised by a person in ‘regulated activity’ (e.g. a teacher or teaching assistant)
• They’re supervised regularly and on a day-to-day basis
• The supervision is ‘reasonable in all circumstances to ensure the protection of children’.

Just found this online if it makes it clearer

I agree it would increase the risk of transmission. Which is my main problem with it.

I understand people not wanting volunteers going there if they're not DBS checked etc but I don't think it should be open if they need to try and find volunteers.