please read the guidance for schools....

[Ariseandsmellthetea99]

Key points:
-Since hospital grade PPE is neither obtainable (needed for medical staff) nor practical for teaching young children (scary and next to impossible to teach in) this is not recommended

• Since face coverings would need to be worn by all the children to have any effect at all (this relates to the science that a face covering only protects those around you not the person wearing), this isn't practical or recommended.

-They are NOT suggesting children are kept separate from all other children (as some fairly alarming photos on social media have shown).

-Children should be kept away from others who are NOT in their group bubble (the max 15 other children they WILL be mixing with). These groups should remain the same with the same adult to limit exposure for the adult.

• Any staff who are (clinically) vulnerable or live with someone vulnerable should be leading remote learning from home.

-Any children who are (clinically) vulnerable or who live with vulnerable should stay at home

• Parents should be socially distanced. To enable this, each bubble of 15 children should be dropped off at a different entrance or time.

If you disagree with these measures, please say what measure you think would be better, since children remaining home for up to 2 years is neither desirable nor healthy.

mrpickles almost one third of adults in England are obese. (And a further 38% are overweight). It's likely a third of school staff are also obese, in that case. That's before we get to heart, kidney, lung disease etc.

Scatterbrainbox its not about being blase its about seeing it in perspective. We should shield those who are vulnerable but not all of us are vulnerable so the rest of us need to keep the show on the road otherwise the whole thing falls apart. The media has been overly effective at stressing the risk and people can't see it relative to other risks in life.

ChloeDecker but ultimately if for most people the effect of getting the virus is not that terrible then should we be quite to extreme about the transmission. I'm not saying children won't transmit it - I dont know. I'm saying the risk to children is extremely low and the risk to adults under 50 is extremely low so we shouldn't panic. Yes we should be careful but we dont have to be running for the hills...

The following makes for rather sobering reading don’t you think MrPickles?

Based on ONS stats released the day before yesterday, Education staff deaths are at 361, nurses 127 deaths. It’s horrifically tragic on both sides but don’t you find it interesting that, those working directly with Covid19 patients, with some form of PPE, although I know it is inadequate, have lower stats than those who have not? And during a lockdown with only keyworker and vulnerable children in schools. Once that is lifted...

My issues are:

1. I think it is too soon. Look at what other countries are doing. How many countries have sent their children back to school with the numbers we have? Why are we different.

1. I don't know how classes can be split in two without having to be part-time as there simply isn't the space for them. We can't use secondary schools because they will have Y10 and Y12 in their groups of 15 to fit in. In our school outside space is a no go because there's zeros shade and children are wilting in that summer term after a lunch break outside.

1. When I was in working with keyworker children we didn't get a break all day so that the children didn't spend time with any extra adults. It was ok because there were two of us so nipping to the loo was possible. If there's only one adult with 15 children all day when do they get to go to the toilet?

1. We don't have separate toilets for the different classrooms we have (never mind the imaginary extra ones we'll need). So children from different bubbles will inevitably end up mixing in the toilets. Unless they are only allowed to the toilet at set times (good luck with the 4 yr olds).

1. In my school, only staff with shielding letters will stay at home which means that some vulnerable staff are going to be put at higher risk than I feel they should be. Of course, they will need all the staff they can get to cope with double the number of classes.

1. Almost half the bubbles will be lead by a TA rather than a teacher. I'm a TA. I think I'm a fairly good one. I am not a teacher, I have not had teacher training, it will not be the same for the children.

I'm not saying that all these things are insurmountable. I'm sure for most of it we'll find a way. That's just my first thoughts. The only real issue I have is the timing and speed of wanting all primary children in school. I'd rather extend the keyworker scheme to all parents who need the childcare so they can work. I know people need to work and I think it's important that we support that. I just don't think to have primary schools fully returned within a few weeks (mid-June) is necessary.

My DH is a maths teacher pickles so kind if vital. He has a chronic heart condition and is over 50. Hth

And see that 31 percent for the heart disease patients for death? They aren't shielded. Unbelievable but true. So expected by many employers to work.

babybythesea our village school is v small and we have a parent as a cleaner. Fortunately I would say none of our staff is obese, I don't know about their medical records and a couple are over 50. Let's assume 1/3rd? of staff won't be able to come in. But I also expect about 1/3rd of parents will keep their kids off.
So now we have 3 classes in the whole school each with about 18 children in each, 2 teachers and about 6 TAs. Its not ideal I grant you but it has to be better than home schooling / no schooling for some of the kids given the risk to them is minscule?

Will each class have a TA to take pupils to the loo and ensure handwashing takes place?

No, because the TAs will be in charge of their own bubbles. So either you have to trust the children to go unsupervised, wash their hands properly and not mingle with other bubbles in the toilets, or they have to go as a group of 15 at set times.

Piggywaspushed its a 31% increase in the risk of dying if you have a heart condition not 31% of people with heart conditions will die. Remember its quite hard to catch covid. The R is now below 1 which means that the average COVID catcher passes it onto less than 1 person. Its not like each sufferer passes it onto 10 people.
I'm not saying we shouldn't stay alert and I for one will be alert. I think we need to be sensible and try to make a workable solution for everyone. There may not be vaccine for atleast 2 years so there's nothing to say that september will be any safer than June.

All of the measures are to try to get back to normal as far as possible while keeping the R rate below 1

I can see the "getting back to normal" part of the strategy but I can't see what they're putting in place to keep the R down. The R is lowered by all the restrictions that they are now removing, so logic says that will mean the R going up unless there is an alternative way of managing it such as test/track/trace.

What’ll happen to all the pupils with additional needs who need a 1:1 TA to access the classroom, if their TA has been pressganged into teaching 15 children they aren’t trained for?

That is almost certainly what will happen. They will just have to manage without. The word "unprecedented" will probably be used.

There may not be vaccine for atleast 2 years so there's nothing to say that september will be any safer than June.

See, why does it have to be all or nothing? If you read the union documents or listen to teachers on the news or listed to the opposition in parliament, no one is saying keep schools closed till a vaccine. They are asking for clearer guidance, asking for the evidence that has been used to inform the govt decisions and requesting that safety is considered more deeply than ‘we’ll leave it up to you to decide’.
Headteachers are genuinely frightened of making the wrong call. You may think it is too small to worry about but these are lives at risk. The least the govt can do, is do their job properly, consult with education staff and their scientific advisors it beggars belief they have not even consulted the Chief Scientific Advisor for Education and come up with something that wasn’t written in 24 hours as a copy and paste job by someone who has never sent foot in a school since they left as a student.
I want to schools to go back and so does every other teacher on here but in the safest way that the children and staff and their families deserve. Anyone who wants to rush that needs to have a good look at themselves.

__now compare it to working in a prison, court, probation office, child protection team, police station working with adults who are wilfully ignoring all guidance, including persisting in sharing I travenous drug paraphernalia, refuse to sanitise etc when asked and also spit/hurl bodily fluids at you.
The guidance and PPE recommendations are the same as for teachers, except we've all been in work the whole time.

I couldn’t agree more

I also love the way Gavin Williamson is holding up Denmark as the example. Where they have far more school staff, and more importantly only 600 deaths from covid19.

The guidance and PPE recommendations are the same as for teachers, except we've all been in work the whole time.

I couldn’t agree more

And yet I was working on school site today and have many many teachers, with the rest working from home. Not all NHS staff have been physically in work the whole time either for example and not because they are vulnerable or ill either and haven’t even been working from home (Optometrist for a hospital I know is one) but the vitriol for teachers as fair game for false accusations is rife here. The guidance isn’t the same for teachers by the by but I do know PPE is dire elsewhere.

To finish, I’ll expand more of those ONS stats:
Education staff deaths 361, nurses 127 deaths,police 39 deaths, bus drivers 79 deaths

If this is the suggestion for primary pupils, will the same apply to secondary pupils in September? I know everyone is hoping that the virus will have blown over by then, but by my reckoning we could be having the third peak around then, especially if everyone has been out & about during the 6 weeks holiday. Ds school has 2180 pupils on the roll at present, the building they are in is already full to bursting as it was only planned for 1800 pupils but being an academy they saw that more pupils meant more money & increased numbers. The corridors aren't very wide, only 2 metres maximum, each department is on a dead end leg spanning from the central body where the dining hall, central atrium, offices & performing arts hall are, at lesson changeover it is bedlam. The dining hall is only big enough for two years at a time, so there are three staggered sittings over a 90 minute period which is taken as a break in a 90 minute lesson, the performing arts hall will only seat 300 if everyone is sat elbow to elbow, forms in years 7-11 are 35 pupils in 12 forms plus 80 pupils in sixth form. How the heck are they going to manage social distancing with that many, even if they operate a two shift system? Both ds & I have got it in our minds that A levels could take 3 years allowing for future lockdown periods & any less will be a bonus.

For those that are suggesting to social distance in the school classrooms. How could this be done? Wouldn’t you need more teachers?

This is not a competition of who is a home and who is not. People have different circumstances and I think the children will not be going back to school in June or if they do some parents won’t send their children which is fair enough.

I thought it was "up to 15" , according to the space available once 2m distancing has been implemented.

No, guidance quite clearly states that is not possible in primary.

- Any staff who are (clinically) vulnerable or live with someone vulnerable should be leading remote learning from home.

-Any children who are (clinically) vulnerable or who live with vulnerable should stay at home

It does not say this.
It says "a child/young person or member of staff who lives with someone who is clinically vulnerable (but not clinically extremely vulnerable), including those that are pregnant, can attend their education or childcare setting.

School governor here. Quite worried that the ultimate reopening decision will be ours. Naturally we are going to follow LA advice. If we depart from that in either direction we are very open to criticism of which there will be plenty on both sides. If a staff member dies or gets very sick it is hard to think about how responsible we are all going to feel for what decisions were taken. My day job is in healthcare and one colleague in my Trust has been very sick on ITU and one died. It is a realistic concern. If we don't reopen and other schools do however there will be howls of protest and complaints. I have almost never regretted the day I took this stupid unpaid volunteer role more.

I really can't see how the bubbles of 15 children to 1 member of staff will work certainly not full time. We'd need twice the staff and twice the classroom space we usually have despite having in fact less staff due to shielding. That is if teachers are willing to work under the proposed conditions at all. They have been advised by unions currently not to enter into any discussion so the head can have no real idea how many staff they'd actually be able to rely on.

Maybe it can be done for nursery, YR, Y1, Y6 although it will require staff redeployments as some will be shielded/ vulnerable so won't be the usual teacher. Might not even be an EYFS specialist if we have none who can go in. For all year groups it's literally impossible. The LA says on that 'we are not planning for this at all' ie they know it won't happen.

If half the class has the TA and half get the teacher there will be moaning about unfairness but that's surely what would have to happen.

If the idea is to stay in bubbles and stop exposure to other adults then does the teacher/ TA just get no break at all?! Not even a toilet break? That's just not legal. Presumably they have to supervise lunch in the classroom and breaks as there would be no additional staff contact. What about teachers PPA time?

If we try to respect 2m distancing then we can only get about 9 children in a classroom so we'd need 6-7 classrooms and staff just for our 60 reception children. Totally impossible hence why government are not suggesting it. Unions aren't happy though if 2m can't be maintained. That looks like an impasse to me.

We are told the key worker provision should continue too and the remote learning for other year groups. Not sure how there will be enough staff for all these. If staff are to go back to their teaching jobs how can they also be expected to do childcare in half term?

As things stand we have much fewer support staff too (vulnerable, shielding) ie caretaker, cleaners. Are maintenance jobs also down to teachers too? Staff have been doing the cleaning themselves during keyworker sessions but I doubt they'd be happy to continue if going back to normal teaching hours and enhanced cleaning is required. I guess we need to hire additional cleaners presumably with no additional budget in record time still completing all safeguarding checks etc.

No way can we offer wrap around care. That is a total non starter. Not enough staff and not enough room. I expect this will also provoke complaints. The LA ask us to 'consider how we might do this' answer 'in a month of Sundays'

I think part time hours is the most sensible option. As a parent I'd feel happy with this as a compromise. It would be safer and would allow DC some teaching and social contact and parents some uninterrupted work time (I think it's OK to want that. If I wanted to teach/ was any good at teaching I'd be a teacher) Its better than what we've got. Surely people can't be expecting business as usual.

However our LA is quite bizarrely stating that we should offer full time and that rather than part time hours we should exclude Y6 and then Y1 if unable to admit them safely ie they are prioritising nursery and YR going full time over the other year groups getting anything. I can't see any education or health reason for that. It has to be basically for childcare.

Massively mixed messages from the LA suggesting we risk assess and make plans for June 1st but also saying no final decision is made yet and they will support us if we decide not to open. Heads and governors look like we'll be carrying the can for whatever unpopular decision we make.

Remember its quite hard to catch covid.

Not sure the scientists agree otherwise there's no way we'd be taking the sort of measures we have.

The R is now below 1 which means that the average COVID catcher passes it onto less than 1 person. Its not like each sufferer passes it onto 10 people.

The R value is not an inherent property of the virus. It is governed by our social behaviours. You know, the whole stay home thing. The only reason it's below 1 is because we are not interacting with as many people as normal.

Did you watch the Danish thing on BBC? Can't remember the name of the virologist on there, Chris something? He said it was unlikely that kids would get it seriously but that their parents would definitely be at risk of catching it. No mention of the staff.

The R value without intervention is something like 3. So lets say a child with no symptoms goes to school. Passes it on to 3 other kids. So in 5 days time the original child is still contagious, the new 3 kids are as well. Now the teacher is in a probably poorly ventilated classroom with 4 kids shedding virus, for 6 hours every day. Do we not see a viral load problem?

Also, as someone upthread said, if I'm supervising kids for 6 hours, and adults have to be consistent, when do I get to go to the toilet?

@WokeUpSmeltTheCoffee

Can I just say thank you for such a well thought out and informative post. Your school is very lucky to have you as a governor.

I work in a 4 form entry infant school. As the Government's guidelines also expect our Nursery setting to be operational from 1 June, that is three quarters of our children that need to be accommodated.

We have 16 potentially usable rooms (this will involve reorganising the ICT room, the sensory room, the school hall and the library) for 18 'bubbles' of 15 children. We do have TLAs, but only the HTLA ever gets to float for PPA cover - all the others deal 1 to 1 with children who have SEN.

(Theoretically our children with an EHCP have been allowed access to school throughout, in practice most parents have kept their child at home, because being in a small group of differing age children, in a classroom that's not theirs, and not having their one to one there every time is just too much for the poor sausages - so bringing them back to school under the new framework is going to be really distressing for them the first week or so).

In addition we will have the key worker and vulnerable children from Y2, who have been coming in throughout and will still need to be accommodated. The guidelines suggest not only that we use our TAs for teaching the extra classes created but that we go outside and teach in 'outdoor classrooms' if there are problems with internal space. British weather being what it is, this will be of limited educational value for Y1/Y2 if they're expecting us to follow the curriculum...

Staggered pick up and drop off is another non-starter as we only have 4 entrances/exits to the school - one of which is the staff car park! - and all but one are narrow with no opportunity for social distancing. Only one has the capacity to be a one-way 'through' system. Our school building is 90 years old and has developed in a very higgeldy-piggedly manner over the years. The classrooms are far too small for 15 children or the teacher to maintain social distancing unless we rip up the EYFS curriculum and give up on learning through play, making them sit in rows of desks like the Victorians.

The vast majority of our teachers really want to get back and see their classes again, but these guidelines are unclear and drawn up by someone with no idea about how schools run and how most school buildings are/were designed.

I'd much rather they'd have said our Y2 can come back so that they can say goodbye to their teachers and make their transition to Juniors. Y2 also far more sensible (this is only relatively speaking!) about hand washing and toileting etc. However it appears this decision was not taken for the benefit of children's education, but for economic reasons. Those of our middle class, white collar parents (who can work from home) that have expressed an opinion have said they're not sending their children back until it's 'safe'. Our working poor parents will have no choice and are being used as guinea pigs.
That's what rankles with me.

I don’t understand how the bubble idea will work with the little ones. What happens when someone has an accident,? how will the adult change them and watch the class ?( plus safeguarding means two adults should’ve changing them). Lots of schools gave cut back on TAs due to funding cuts do staffing could be a huge issue, before you even think about those shielding. What if someone is ill? Does that whole bubble not come in that day? Schools are desperately trying to make plans but there are so many factors to negotiate.

I am fully aware of that pickles. A 31% increased risk of dying s not good.