So the school guidance is out...

[Norecallpup]

Sorry if this has already been done. I could cry, I really could. Absolutely nothing. Just wash your hands, wipe down surfaces and encourage kids to cough into tissues! I don’t know why I’m shocked. Our government are a bunch of twats!

randomschoolworker that is what I understood from the guidance as well. Effectively the bubbles become "households" and mix within but not outside the group.

If any child in a bubble tests positive, the rest of the bubble will self isolate for 2 weeks (as will teacher).

If there are limited social contacts outside of school the bubbles are theoretically relatively low risk as an overall strategy and I think 1 week in 3 of in- school work is better than every day in school but no going within 2 m of anyone which, as you say, is impossible to maintain.

I don't know how else we will ever go back to school as no vaccine is coming soon, and there are 1000s of children out there who really need school from a welfare point of view. It's scary though, for sure.

Have you seen this?

Joint statement from the education unions. Absolutely fair enough and nothing unreasonable or inflammatory here I'd say.

A fair, reasonable outline with consideration given to vulnerable & economically deprived children:

IMMEDIATE: JOINT EDUCATION UNION STATEMENT

Wednesday 13 May 2020: for immediate release TUC press office: 020 7467 1248

Education unions’ statement on the safe reopening of schools

Unions with members in the education sector are today (Wednesday) publishing a joint statement on the safe reopening of schools.

Today’s statement follows a longer statement to the Secretary of State on Friday (8 May), which set out in full detail the principles and tests necessary for the safe reopening of schools. It is signed by AEP, GMB, NAHT, NASUWT, NEU, NSEAD, Prospect, UNISON and Unite.

Full text of today’s statement:

“We all want schools to re-open, but that should only happen when it is safe to do so. The government is showing a lack of understanding about the dangers of the spread of coronavirus within schools, and outwards from schools to parents, sibling and relatives, and to the wider community.

“Uniquely, it appears, school staff will not be protected by social distancing rules. 15 children in a class, combined with their very young age, means that classrooms of 4 and 5-year olds could become sources of Covid-19 transmission and spread. While we know that children generally have mild symptoms, we do not know enough about whether they can transmit the disease to adults. We do not think that the government should be posing this level of risk to our society.

“We call on the government to step back from the 1st June and work with us to create the conditions for a safe return to schools based on the principles and tests we have set out.”

The principles and tests include (see full statement from Friday 8 May, linked to below):

· Safety and welfare of pupils and staff as the paramount principle

· No increase in pupil numbers until full rollout of a national test and trace scheme

· A national Covid-19 education taskforce with government, unions and education stakeholders to agree statutory guidance for safe reopening of schools

· Consideration of the specific needs of vulnerable students and families facing economic disadvantage

· Additional resources for enhanced school cleaning, PPE and risk assessments

· Local autonomy to close schools where testing indicates clusters of new covid-19 cases

ENDS

Perhaps they could also have asked for further clarity on years 10 and 12? Secondary heads all also now think they are back (in some form) form the 1st.

This is highly highly contradictory and confusing (no surprises there).

A bubble would be tricky in my class. I teach nursery and can’t imagine any of the teachers from further up school being able to/wanting to teach my class. The reception teachers will be splitting their class as will Y1 teachers.
Nursery is so different from any class above year one and none of the other teachers are trained for nursery.
I have 56 children, some full time and some part time from 2 to 4 years old. That’s almost 4 bubbles of 15. It’s so difficult to think of a safe way to do this which is actually beneficial to the children and working parents.
It means, if I do work with every bubble, that I’ll have contact with nearly 60 families. Over 60 if I still take a turn with key worker kids.

Perhaps they could also have asked for further clarity on years 10 and 12? Secondary heads all also now think they are back (in some form) form the 1st

Mine doesn’t. It doesn’t say that anywhere- just that exam years may get some face to face time to enhance their online learning.

Although you’re not wrong that it’s unclear.

Notsafetogo

My understanding is that you would only be within one bubble, as a measure to help reduce the spread. So if you had 60 children there will need to be 4 groups of up to 15, each with their own adult/s

Although if i'm wrong in my interpretation then i'm more than happy to be corrected.

@theluckiest

But that basically says no one in teaching will countenance an increase in student numbers until the government has track and trace up and running. To be honest, I don't think that is realistic. I think that the bubble idea is quite sensible to be honest - it is what other countries are doing.

I have talked to other parents with children in DS's class.

It's possible that out of 60 you might get 3 classes back at most. It's more likely to be closer to two from what's been said.

Which ironically might solve some of the logistics issues immediately.

I think the bubble thing has its merits to be honest. But I think what the unions are saying is just slow it down...let's take small steps as there are so many unknowns and variables at this point. Why are we rushing into this??

But there's also this which is why school staff are, frankly, frightened...

go.mumsnet.com/?xs=1&id=470X1554755&url=www.tes.com/news/coronavirus-revealed-least-26-teachers-have-died-covid-19

But that basically says no one in teaching will countenance an increase in student numbers until the government has track and trace up and running.

As it should be.

It's the bare minimum and needs at least a week of running too to iron out problems.

1st June is such a ridiculous target.

@RedToothBrush

Exactly! Why don't schools see who would come back before opposing this?

@RedToothBrush

I don't think that is remotely realistic to be honest. Lots of countries are opening schools without a full track and trace programme. I agree that implementation should be slower than the government suggest but I think there is a compromise somewhere

@theluckiest

But there doesn't seem to be much evidence that teachers are dying at a higher rate than the general population given their age profile etc is there? Bus drivers definitely are. Would be interested to see the statistics for teachers.

Sorry, don't think this link copied properly:

www.tes.com/news/coronavirus-revealed-least-26-teachers-have-died-covid-19

Exactly! Why don't schools see who would come back before opposing this?

They shouldn't have to be asking.

All the government policy has to be is, more along the lines of saying that return to school can be prioritised in some way, instead of the whole political shit of dumping on teachers who have been very much taken for granted as babysitters by government.

Even now the policy is all about economics rather than primarily about the welfare of all children.

The government has legitimised 'bash a teacher' by producing guidelines that teachers can't possibly agree to. They know they couldn't and wouldn't but issued them anyway.

It's fashionable to clap for the NHS and carers (who have been martyrs to the cause and its regarded as a scandal when they haven't had PPE) but teachers? No they aren't working hard enough and are being shit for asking for PPE in the work place and safe working practices (some pretty good cognitive dissonance going on here).

Go figure...

redtoothbrush
I don't agree that the policy is "all about economics" and it's unlike you to be unbalanced or polarised in an opinion.

Part of the reason for the younger children returning is economic as it's bloody hard to wfh with a 4 or 5 year old. But the Reception year is also absolutely fundamental in establishing the foundations of education: how to share and get along with others, how to do what someone else wants you to when they want you to, even if it's not that interesting, how to focus and pay attention when you're part of a group, and the beginning roots of literacy and numeracy. We know there are big consequences for many many years of children especially those from poorer backgrounds don't access high quality early years education; and conversely that these foundations well established improve life chances for disadvantaged children for years ahead. And nobody come and say Scandi children don't start school til 7 because they also have an excellent extended preschool system which looks at those core skills apart from the literacy and numeracy.

I think it's easy to sit in a middle class bubble where your child is well stimulated, has plenty of toys and books, is going to the park and on treasure hunts and baking cakes with Daddy and think "we need to stay home much longer", I know because I feel that too - but there are plenty of children who are having a very impoverished time in terms of experience and nurture and 6 months out at age 4 is potentially very damaging for a long long time to come.

I know vulnerable children are theoretically entitled to school; but we also know a very tiny proportion are accessing it.

Incidentally I absolutely agree, redtoothbrush that the government handling of this has been indefensible.

People need to be included in planning and to feel that they are heard and staff need to be on board. High handed pronouncements that have not been collaboratively explored or produced is terrible, terrible psychology.

We ,might need to accept we just cannot afford to pay teachers who are not in school nor educate children who are out of school as a starting point.

As has been said previously, the main problem with the guidance is that it is vague and woolly, as well as being in direct contradiction to the guidance for all other places of work.

It will all be left to individual schools to organiseso they can be blamed when parents are not happy. In 3 weeks we will see umpteen threads on MN moaning from posters moaning that their Y1 child is only attending 2 days per week while their cleaner's Auntie's next door neighbour's child at private school is in from 7-5 every day.

I don't agree that the policy is "all about economics" and it's unlike you to be unbalanced or polarised in an opinion.

My argument is its a blanket policy for all 4 and 5 year olds rather than one about prioritising children based on need to return.

In terms of DS going back to school why should he be before a children in another age group who hasn't got the same level of support to him?

I also don't think those who needed more support during lockdown have been given it. Extra financial support to schools with low levels of contact with school hasn't been given.

We've had massive campaigns for food and for appreciation the NHS but very little publicity for any which involve helping with educational issues.

The PR has been that teachers havent engaged which has gone particularly unnoticed by most people. (part of the problem here child protection as it doesn't make for TV as families can't be identified). No one sees the hours of teachers trying to explain things to fraught parents or teachers via email either.

Most teachers will have a fair idea of who will benefit most from returning to school earlier imo.

In some areas there will be particularly high numbers but that makes the case even more concerntrated resources and better alternative arrangements through lockdown should have been enabled and encouraged - which carries through to reopening.

What really is annoying at the moment is some of the faux concern for some of the most deprived kids that's on display this week on MN as justification for reopening schools on 1st June by parents who have childcare issues. As soon as their kids go back these vulnerable kids will be instantly forgotten and be seen more as a problem rather than as in need.

There's little thought been given to social workers and the pressures there (indeed many teachers are actively taking on the role if social work in the absence of this at no extra pay). Social Work has barely been on the radar of the appreciation of key workers its just 'teachers not doing enough'.

People don't know how much time is being devoted to other kids by teachers. Having a moan about an inadequate worksheet in this context by some parents is frustrating. The teachers can't explain nor defend how they are spending their time to other parents if they have a handful who they are devoting huge amounts of time to at the expense of other kids who are doing OK.

@GrimmsFairytales yes you’re right, that’s how it should work but we don’t have the staff to have 4 different teachers to do a day each for each bubble of that makes sense.

My school need 2 teachers for reception, two for year one, two for year six and four for my class.

We only have 8 teachers. It just won’t work.
I have said I’ll go in and have each group but SLT are very reluctant to go against guidelines.
It’s going to be very difficult to suit everybody. I will be disappointed if we can’t go back on the 1st. I want to see my class, I want to get back to as normal as possible. BUT I also want to be safe and I want my own kids to be safe.
@RedToothBrush I love you xx

I'm not sure why there is the obsession with not paying teachers who are not in school when they are still working.

Schools are paying staff as their staff are working. It's as simple as that. If schools do reopen on June 1st we will also need to pay those teachers and school staff who are in.

If a child is in the shielding group they deserve an education just like all other school children across the UK so we need to be able to offer them some sort of home/online learning.

If a teacher or school member of staff is shielding, they can be the ones to coordinate the home learning and deliver education from home (whatever they will look like)

There is work to be done so why wouldn't we pay those who are qualified to do it?

Xenia we can't just not educate children who are at home through no fault of their own. If a parents wants to home school that's fine and they can crack on with it. If a child is shielding due to sickle cell for example, should they effectively be punished for not being able to come into school?

I'm getting pretty sick and tired of hearing that school staff are not working so shouldn't be paid!

Who do you think has been babysitting the children of key workers for the last couple of months, including the Easter Holidays which TAs such as myself don't get paid for (pro rata salary).

Who do you think has been delivering food to vulnerable children and learning packs to all the children? Who do you think has been assisting stressed out parents and setting up online learning?

If a banker works on their laptop at home they're being productive and working smart. A teacher does it and they're sitting on their arse.

Double standards FFS!

I’ve said this on another thread but I will make the point again here.

This idea of bubbles is great. Until you look at what will happen in practice. Say you have three kids. Reception, year 4 and year 6.
Your reception child goes to school one day and in their bubble is a child who later turns out to have Covid. Fine. Isolate the whole group of 15 kids plus one teacher. But your child has come home and mixed freely with siblings. Who then go into school and mix with their bubbles of 15 kids plus one teacher. So now, potentially, you have 45 kids and three teachers who could test positive.
When the school already is a number of staff down, due to shielding, what happens next?

We had actually planned to go back in family bubbles. We are a small rural school and loads of the kids have cousins in the school, some of whom have essentially operated as one huge household (different houses but all working on the family farm so mixing freely between the cousins). So we will magnify this if those kids come back to school as cousins etc all mix as well.
The gvt plans haven’t taken this sort of thing into account.

I’m not against working. At all. I’m a TA not a teacher but I’ve been working anyway. We had plans. TheY don’t work in light of the gvt decision that the youngest kids should go back first and are all having to be redone.
I think it’s rushed.
I worry about the mental health of the youngest kids returning. Kids who cry anyway and have to be peeled off their mum after a holiday now can come to school, but instead of their own teacher, and all their friends, and all the toys that make it fun to come to school, they may not have their teacher, their close friends may not be in their bubble, and their room will look very different. If they are indeed in their familiar classrooms, all the soft toys they played with will be gone, all the comfy cushions will be gone, anything that cannot be easily cleaned will be gone. I won’t be going to get them from mum and give them a hug, because I can’t go near mum. They will have to let go and walk of their own volition across a space to me, when they haven’t seen me for several months. Some will. Some really won’t want to. What then? Some of these kids will be as young as four, remember.

I do not object to working. I do think it should have been the older kids first, the ones for who school isn’t a slightly intimidating place to begin with. The ones who understand social distancing and why they’ve lost things from their classrooms. Years 5 and 6. Or, as we had planned, families, so they can sit with a sibling for some reassurance that school has not gone completely out of control.

To me this smacks of economics. Get the little ones back because it’s harder to work from home with a four year old running round than a 9 year old. They have said it’s because the education of that age is important. I don’t believe that this is the reason, it’s all a pile of bullshit to justify themselves. It is not about education yet. How are we going to teach them much when the resources we usually use have been removed and the teacher they have is actually a Ta seconded from Year 3? Chalk and talk? We ditched that by and large with reception because it doesn’t work. Instead, we will spend our time working to reassure them that they are safe. And explaining why they can’t go on the climbing frame at playtime.
If it was education why aren’t year 10s and 12s a priority group?

And I’m fed up with hearing everyone I work with being called lazy because we are worried. I am worried about what this will do to very little children. Because it will not be normal, and what they knew. And after everything else they have been through, do we really need to throw another heap of abnormality onto them?