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

[Crunchymum]

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

@pipnchops

My understanding is that it is optional but that they don’t want to stress this fact as they are trying to get as many vulnerable and neglected kids as possible to return. They model for the assumption that some parents who are managing with the children at home will choose to keep them home.

Statutory guidance should be released later today which will hopefully make this clearer.

I’m not convinced it’s going to be optional. I listen to the daily briefing most days, pretty sure Matt Hancock dodged that question by saying something about the government saying ‘when it’s safe.’

This was my first thought. As YR and Y1 children won't be able to social distance they will be able to see what happens to the R after a few weeks of them being in school. Then decide if it's safe for other year groups to return.

If they had started with Y6, Y10 and Y12 which was widely expected it would have been hard to say as more of those groups will be able to maintain social distancing.m and hygiene measures.

^*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.*^

This is why.

I have a 4yo and a 12yo. Although the 12yo is fed up, he will cope until September.

If my 4yo doesn't interact with other children then I can see long term implications. I'm also wfh and he has regressed with his learning.

No, it’s not an experiment, it’s about opening up society again in a slow phased balanced manner, and monitoring the infection rate as they do so. At the same time picking those who most need to go back.

I hope it’s optional too, I won’t be sending mine in either way but it will make things easier if I don’t have to worry about fines etc.

I never understand why they give an address but make everyone wait 24hrs for the guidance, why don’t they just wait to do the address until the guidance is available?

Like other posters I assume that they have chosen the age groups for a couple of reasons.

Firstly, the early years of education are such important years in terms of outcomes at 18, or even 21. Study after study shows inequalities at this age are incredible difficult to tackle. For every R and Y1 child who has patient and diligent parents at home ploughing through Twinkl and school set work, there may another who is falling further and further behind their peers, and may never regain the lost ground.

Secondly, they cannot learn remotely without extensive parental input, - if you want parents back at work, these ids need to be in school.

It's also important for them socially; I have a Y1 at home and they just don't get remote chats/socialising in the way an older child does.

If the re-opening with these years goes OK, I can see Y10 and 12 being back, and potentially the other primary age groups (maybe on a part time rota type basis) but the other secondary year groups can mostly cope with remote learning so may not be back until September.

In my work I see schools from Nursery to Sixth Form and there is little doubt the Y7 and upwards remote provision is much more effective, even though staff in all age groups are working hard, it's about the maturity of the pupils.

There not going to sick at distance from R and Y1 and the kids aren’t going to distance from each other. These kids need to get some person to person interaction urgently, not formal learning but more talking to another human, touching another human, sitting at a table to eat a meal, doing something that isn’t TV, running around, playing with toys.....so many little kids are not getting this right now and the consequences could well be life long and much worse than any risk for coronavirus for the vast majority.

Teachers are a worry but I hope schools will ensure that the teachers that do work with these kids are the most healthy with the least at risk families, with only three years back maybe they can ask for volunteers? At my dd school (I’m nhs so she’s in) the teachers that are in are the young single ones (one in particular- young single chap, early 20s normally at teachers older primary, had been amazing, realising he’s not much at risk and has done 99% of the care of the eyfs kids that are in, he’s fantastic and has totally made this whole thing better for my DD - and yes I have told him and bring treats in every Friday)

I get it dosent make sense to people that they can’t meet granny but can go to school, however granny is at risk and their peers aren’t, so they should meet their peers. As adults we are not at a key point of development so us not seeing people for ages is horrid but we can rationalise it, for the vulnerable young kids they need to socialise and exercise and play or they may be damaged for ever

Teachers are a worry but I hope schools will ensure that the teachers that do work with these kids are the most healthy with the least at risk families, with only three years back maybe they can ask for volunteers?

In infant schools, that is most of the school back-it won’t be volunteers-it’ll be everyone in and we still won’t be able to have all y1 and reception children in at once.

I’m very glad my children aren’t in those year groups-there’s no way I’d let them be mining canaries for the government.

Probably numerous reasons but my thoughts

1. Harder to WFH with a child that age
2. Virus risk to young children v low
3. Cannot socially distance them so in effect you have a 'what impact do kids have on R' right there. If kids of that age don't massively impact on spread then it's likely other primary school children won't either as they are likely to be a little more hygienic etc

I wonder if the government will actually give guidance to schools on how to accommodate the children (half classes etc) or just leave it to them to sort out. Not sure if they’re even going to expect social distancing to happen.

@banjaxxed

I agree those are the reasons they have selected these years to return. Especially point 3.

My problem with this though is that they have not considered the impact of this test on the children’s mental health. If they find that sending these children back does make the R number rise above 1, presumably they will need to close schools again. These young children will not understand going back to school to then have to go back to home learning, to then presumably go back to school again in the autumn!

And many children have still caught the virus and become very ill, just because there are not as many cases as with adults doesn’t mean it isn’t a concern for many parents. My aunt is a nurse who caught the virus from a Covid Ward, she has thankfully recovered after having mild symptoms, her two children however have been really quite ill with it!

I’m a children’s nurse and have seen some very sick children with Covid

I’m pretty sure me and DH will keep our Year 1 child at home for as long as possible, even if schools do re-open.

We personally think we won’t send him back for at least a month after schools have opened and we have enough reassurance that there aren’t lots of children coming down with it and there hasn’t been a marked jump in the infection and death rates.

As the “elite” of this country seem to have been raised as sociopaths, devoid of empathy or humanity, it probably makes perfect sense to them that 4/5 year olds could adhere to social distancing.

I can just imagine the bunch of suited ham heads discussing it, thinking they know anything helpful about young children, when they barely acknowledge the existence of their own progeny. They themselves were probably social distanced from birth.

Like fuck am I trusting this feckless government with my 5 year old. If it’s not made optional then we are going to most definitely be suffering from an unknown cough in June.

Queen i know everyone is focussing on the deaths. Even for adults, completely ignoring the hospitalisations.
I think though yr r and 1 are most able to learn outside.
I guess if you have to be with someone 15min kids are less likely to be in 1 place. But that could mean they infect lots mildly.