That is true, but i still seem to have a better grasp of what it says than you do.
We allow me to post the executive summary the experts produced themselves
". The role of children in passing the disease to others is unknown, in particular given unknown numbers of asymptomatic cases. Notably, the China/WHO joint commission could not recall episodes during contact tracing where transmission occurred from a child to an adult. Studies of multiple family clusters have revealed children were unlikely to be the index case, in Guangzhou, China, Israel, the USA, Switzerland and internationally. Limited data on positive cases in schools have not demonstrated significant transmission, except within adolescent populations. Studies of younger children in schools have found low rates of transmission, but with very low case numbers.
This does not say transmission from children does not happen. It says children are less likely to pass it on particularly younger ones, cases have occurred at a lower rate compared to adults and it does seem to spread more readily in adolescent children. Thus the policy of excluding under 11's seems sensible. It is also consistent with empirical data and events in Israel where schools initially opened to bubbles of 30 for younger pupils with no apparent effect but when opened to all schools resulted in significant cases a month later. Around half of cases were traced to schools.
At the moment the transmission from children is said to be unknown , which is quite different from it doesn't happen. I am not sure how you prove adults don't catch it from children unless that child is the adults not social contact.