Are they using R, Y1 and Y6 as an experiment?

[Crunchymum]

To see how the R rate is after these year groups go back?

I think from a developmental point of view maybe they are looking at from the fact that there are some parents who really don’t interact with their children, and I am not talking hot housing them but fundamental things like reading with them. How many children turn up in YR in nappies or not being able to use a knife and fork (and I am not talking about children here with SEN) Or not knowing what a book is. One local Primary School have started supervising brushing children’s teeth as that is not being done at home. This obviously has a huge impact on all children but probably more so developmentally when they are young, so this may be a reason why they have chosen the youngest ones.

Interested how this will work in practice. If classes are spread out requiring other teachers, who will teach their classes remotely? Will they all be in or will it be part time? I know no one yet knows the answers but i wonder what the plan will be taking this forward🤔

I hope not my son is in year 6 and want him to go back to have some closure and say bye to his friends I feel really sad people think my child will be an experiment

All we need to prove it is a grinning photo of a cabinet minister dropping their year R child back to school like Selwyn Gummer and the burger

Surely that's a very poor comparison to make, the government at the time said that the risk of BSE was miniscule and they were correct. It bears no relation at all to the current situation.

We can't stay in lockdown until a vaccine is found, we have to start somewhere.

My son is in year 6. I don’t see the point in him going back to primary school. If he has to go back then I would prefer him to have a few sessions in his senior school, giving him the opportunity to make friends and find his way around before September.

Our WhatsApp group of year 6 parents are going to make sure they get their leavers party when we are allowed to.

I don't understand the logic of Year 6. Teachers will tell you that Y6 go pretty wild anyway once the pressure of SATs is out of the way and they've got the prospect of leaving school in sight. Add to that the fact that they've already mentally checked out and won't be too happy about being in school when their siblings aren't, and I really don't envy their teachers. It's not as if they can do too much about the transition to secondary with no secondary schools open.

Secondary schools are open for key workers’ children and vulnerable children, so they may be able to visit.

It’s because those years are the most dispensable

I was a bit baffled to be honest.

I understand their view that children aren’t affected but what about all the parents?

I have a Year 1 and when walking him to school I’m in close proximity (very close) to hundreds of other Reception and Year 1 parents as we drop off our children and there are then approximately 200 parents in the playground (small playground) whilst we wait for the classroom door to open.

School pick-up is even worse, there are 100’s of parents and children everywhere and it is impossible to socially distance.

As I said, I understand the government think children aren’t affected by the virus, but have they forgotten that for every child that goes into a school there is a parent with them? If Government don’t want any mass gatherings then opening up Reception and Year 1 isn’t the way to go....

I genuinely thought secondary schools would be the first to reopen because

A) it’s an important stage of their education (GCSE’s etc).

B) They will be able to understand the concept of social distancing and are generally more hygienic than young children.

C) Because most of them may be able to walk/cycle themselves to and fro school so there is no generating of large groups of adults in small spaces (parents).

Primary schools are lower risk than secondary on the limited data there is. Secondary pupils may be able to social distance but they are more at risk of getting and spreading the virus.

YR and Y1 might not be in “school” in other European countries but they are in nursery like environments from the same age or younger than YR. it’s not about learning at all it’s about social and physical development. There will be 3-6 year olds who haven’t spoken to another child in months, who are having limited interaction with only one adult, basically being raised by screens, not developing their gross physical skills either. This will severely damage their social and emotional development. Get them back in school, outside as much as possible and just let them play with other kids - no need to social distance as the data shows they are unlikely to transmit the virus and tbh the long term implications of prolonged isolation at this age are much more horrific than Coronavirus.

And nearly every other nation has also prioritised the youngest when sending schools back for the same reasons

I have a reception age child and I'm very interested to know the reason her year has been chosen so thanks for starting this thread. Does anyone have any reliable sources they could link to with the reasons these year groups were chosen?

If it's to help parents who need to work and are struggling to look after younger ones (which makes the most sense to me as they are also opening up childminders and nurseries at the same time) then why not just offer it to those as an option, like the current situation for key workers?

If its because children under 6 are at less risk if they catch it, has this been weighed up against the fact they can still spread it to others at higher risk? And the younger the child the less likely they'll be able to do social distancing.

If it is genuinely because their long term educational attainment will be so badly damaged from missing the last half term of their reception or year 1 year and it is in the child's best interests then that's fine but that doesn't explain why nurseries and childminders are opening at the same time.

I am just speculating of course but to me it seems to be a decision made with the economy in mind and not the best interests of the children and yes, a hint of using them as Guinea pigs. In which case, I'm out.

I have a child in y1 and will absolutely not be sending him back in 4 weeks (we have a 2 week half term).

I understand that they believe younger children to be those least at risk so then why are these children not allowed social interaction with grandparents for example.

My son is keeping up with work set by his teacher, plus other bits and pieces we’ve worked on together, he is practising reading and phonics so I don’t imagine much of a problem academically for him when he goes back. My teen however, is becoming more down as weeks go on and is very concerned about the affect this will have on upcoming GCSE’s! For me educationally, secondary schools needed to be prioritised but this isn’t about education, this is about the economy!

My husband is off work until at least the end of July and he has said that whilst he’s home there is no way our Year 1child be going back to school.

In 21 days ... I hope the virus knows that it has got to change.

lots of over thinking.
They will be sotto g children 2 m apart and minimising contact. He 've not all year groups... not enough space
Year 6 for to secondary transition and the others for continuity for them.
simple

Is it really worth the risk for maybe 10 days at school? Children haven’t seen anyone out of household, me and husband can’t go to work because they are closed but my 4 year old can mix with other children, potentially bring it home and give it to my shielding husband? Bonkers! Not sure I fancy my baby being a guinea pig, I don’t believe this will affect any children’s development in the long run ( unless they are having no homeschool done at all) lots of children are homeschooled in the first place. It’s brilliant for children’s mental health, I suppose if you are a low risk household then the benefits of going back to a hill out way the negatives. Stressful times for all mums risking their most precious thing in life.

@QueenofmyPrinces

It isn’t that children aren’t affected, but rather that some children are being affected far more by not being at school, especially in these year groups.

I think this is hard for a lot of mumsnetters to understand as the very fact you are on mumsnet suggests you are probably an engaged parent and less likely to have children that are disadvantaged in this way.

Return to school is optional, so the intention is that children who don’t need to go to school (who have parents working from home able to engage with them, aren’t at risk of neglect and aren’t struggling significantly with their mental health for example) won’t have to go back, but children who are really suffering at home can.

Currently schools are already open for at risk and vulnerable children (as well as key workers children) but only around 5% are taking up these places. From June 1st hopefully the schools will be able to get far more at risk kids back in, and also kids that haven’t been identified as at risk, but may be struggling with not being at school.

So, yes small children can’t social distance and risk spreading the disease more than at the moment, but for many the consequences of not going to school are far worse than the virus.

It’s all about balance, allowing as little overall contact and mixing as possible, while still supporting those who are suffering. It is the same as why we have key workers, nurses etc. still mixing, rather than just having everyone hide in their homes until this is over.

*its. Rill isn’t for children’s mental health going back to school

*brilliant!!! Hate autocorrect

My dc is in reception at a private school. I am assuming the government will be asking schools for data to assess the situation and see what happens with the R rate when these year groups go back. Will private schools be required to report their infection rates to the government as state schools, I am assuming would? Data can't be just on hospital admissions anymore as children are unlikely to be admitted to hospitals I would think.

I’m a reception teacher and am worried sick about my class and indeed myself and my own kids- one of whom is y10.
We are both guinea pigs.
In fact we both have asthma with blue and brown inhalers which we use prob once or twice a wk, but we didn’t get letters to stay in so won’t qualify for not going back when our year groups are expected to in a few wks, though we have been in total isolation bar me going into school on a rota since the start of lockdown.

The upheaval faced by 4&5 year olds of being off and then going back, only to be off again in the summer and returning in sept- it’s ridiculous!
I think there will be lots of upset children on the first days back, how will I comfort them?
Most of them prob won’t even have me as their teacher so they’ll have to get used to another for the few wks before mid July.

So far we have been told we can’t wear face masks or shields when we are in on our rota days-for fear of upsetting the children. I understand that as a teacher to some extent.
As a human being and a mother, I should be entitled to to protect myself, my family and my class if I get the virus.
Teachers are people too.
If we can’t go to pubs or cinemas at all, why should we be expected to operate in a likely infection pool with no PPE?

Also, Y6 will not do any formal learning and their trips/residential/leavers disco are all cancelled- what is the point?!

How are we so different from Wales and Scotland? Their death and infection rates are significantly lower, yet aren’t going back till September.

It’s all such a mess.

We are the experiment. Your kids and their teachers are experiments.

Listening to all those kids read from 2m away boggles my mind.

social distancing will be hard in schools, but it’s much easier if school isn’t full. Dh is a primary deputy head. He and the headteacher have been making plans for a phased return for some pupils. This includes splitting the classes into smaller groups so they’re not all in one classroom, separate entrances and exits to help with drop-off/pick-up, staggered playtime/lunch and as much outdoor learning provision as they can possibly manage. It’ll be hard to keep the little ones apart, but they will certainly try their very best. It’s not like schools are thinking it’s business as usual once the kids are back in.

Notanotherusernumber, is it optional though? I thought it was all reception, year 1 and year 6 go back first, at the earliest on 1st June. I think optional is a much better idea. It'll keep the numbers down to a more manageable level.