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!

I was just thinking schools are probably going to have even more key workers children as well. I’m a ta who’s been working from home the moment I go back my children will need to go to their schools so will be adding more to the numbers. A lot of schools aren’t going to have to find space for them too.

Noname99
People are not regusingvto work, as, you as a teacher will know. And we can have clear guidelines and then we use those tiny brains to create risk assessments for individual schools. It's whatbother European countries that are opening schools are doing, and as they tend to dothe whole education thing better why can't we, just for once take into account all they are doing not just the bits we like.
Teachers are not saying we won't or don't want to work, we are not saying nothing will work and people on this thread are clearly stating what they feel would make it a safer reopening for staff and pupils.
Teachers as a profession care, they go above and beyond for pupils and make sacrifices to support and keep children safe. We want all our kids in, we want them safe from harm, but part of the safety that we offer high risk children is continuity, known staff, predictable days when home life is anything but. We are well aware of our responsibilities legal or moral. So to ensure we give all children the best school we can just now we need to get it right. If there is no debate we can't highlight risk areas or problems that we, the ones face to face with our kids know will happen.
But you carry on finding your collegues embarrassing. 🤔

@Norecallpup shielding is a very specific term that only applies to the higher risk group, though. There are a huge range of conditions that could be considered 'vulnerable' (I have one, so am not dismissive of this). It needs to be clear, otherwise people take a hugely flexible view of what is vulnerable. At our school before closing nearly 40% of the large teaching staff group were home due to self-defining as being or living with a vulnerable person. This was surprising, given that only 2.2% of the population received a shielding letter and many of these were elderly, while a pretty large proportion of the teaching staff are young, do things like run marathons, without children and we do not live in an area with large numbers of multigenerational households. Of course you can still be young and have a health condition, or be pregnant past 28 weeks for example and not come in... But these statistics suggest that they need to rely on a more official definition.

In Germany, the last year of primary are back. They're in half classes - in 2 days one week, 3 days the next. They social distance. They wear masks in the corridors, but nobody wears a mask in the classroom.

If we need to split classes to 15 in each then that doubles the number of staff and classrooms needed. Even though they are saying staff should stay at home if not required ( not many that will apply to then).
All children to get a month back in Primary, that means by w/c 15th June all children will need to be back in.
We have spent the last 7 weeks looking after key worker children many of whose parents are working in highest risk professions, that has been hard enough but now expecting all the youngest children returning to school with no real idea about social distancing and some who will need reassurance or intimate care, how will that be safe and work successfully?
I could have understood year 5 (who will have sats next year) year 6 who need to transition and maybe even year 1 or 2 but nursery and reception??
It’s very scary and concerning.

I think people are forgetting what happend I'm a lot.of schools just before lockdown happened. At ds's school,.they has already told year 10s to stay home several days before lockdown began because so many teachers we are ill and self isolating that they couldn't staff the school .
That will happen again in a lot.of.schools if infection rates go.up so children will be sent home anyway but it will be out fault

All children to get a month back in Primary, that means by w/c 15th June all children will need to be back in.

Our school is supposed to be on half term until the 8th June...

It feels like the guidance was written for Y6 pupils, and then someone added on early years and Y1 at the last minute. All that stuff about spacing desks out and removing everything that easily be cleaned - fine for y6 (in general) but it 's totally out of context for early years. What, three and four year olds are going to sit at desks without any toys or books?

Genius move by the govt. The teacher pension burden is unsustainable and this could be the solution. It will save millions to pay out the death in service payment for the over 50s rather than the full pension and it will shift a few more of Gove’s “blob”.
(Only partially lighthearted)

Just like everything else in education, those making the decisions have no idea what it is like in a classroom.

If classes are split and other teachers have to step in to 'teach' does that mean that the students of these teachers stop receiving remote learning?

I dont need to send mine back to school, im furloughed from, but i hope he can go back before summer break.
Hes an only child, hes not seen another child for 7 weeks now, I worry that this is really unhealthy and unnatural.
Not to mention im not a teacher and I dont want him to lose more education than he has to.
My siblings work in care settings with people with disabilities, they're not wearing ppe unless working directly with a confirmed case, some of their patients cant distance any more than a child can.
My friend works in a children's residential care home. Same story.
Are teachers more at risk than my brother, sister or friend?

Will the teaching unions flex their muscles over this?

If we need to split classes to 15 in each then that doubles the number of staff and classrooms needed.

The logistics of this mean that all the teaching materials and resources for reception will need to be split and moved into Yr 2's classrooms until they return, with all of Yr2 stuff moved to god knows where.

Repeat for Yr1 and Yr 6.

In terms of logistics, this alone is a hell of a task. Who is going to do it?

And then put it all back again.

If its not safe enough for the kids to all be back, then why are they doing it at all???!

@Littleposh so you realise you were wrong to suggest in your earlier post that all countries are reopening schools. And the ones you list all have different circumstances from the UK, eg locked down earlier. I can't see infection rates dropping enough within the next 3 weeks for it to be safe to open schools everywhere in England. In some areas, the proportion of 20-69 year olds with symptomatic Covid is estimated to be over 1%. I just can't see rates falling rapidly enough. I hope you're right that the government will be prepared to revisit the 1 June date. I fear that they will plough on regardless due to concerns about losing face.

It's tricky, I agree that you can't have a 'one size fits all' policy as schools are so different BUT having such flaky guidance leaves schools open to massive backlash if they do things wrong. What happens if an outbreak occurs in which people lose their lives and the school is deemed to not have taken sufficient precautions?

I have been in school with the children that need to be in and am happy to do so. I don't think we're in a position to have a lot of children back yet. I think it should almost function as a holiday club, schools have an agreed limited number of places and children can attend based on need up to capacity. There could be a points system so the current children are guaranteed a place. Those who don't need to go can continue to learn at home.

I'm not against sending them back but part of me doesn't see the point & agree with this

• We've done 7 weeks. By the time June comes it will be 10 weeks (ish) then have ... what? ... 4/5 weeks of going in part time before the usual 6 off. (and don't get me wrong i wouldn't suggest cancelling the summer holls break)

*Is it worth the hassle? Doing all this for this short time? Will it make the 6 week holls harder having had a taste of school life again?

We are now in a rhythm & reading the guidance (split classes, TAs instead of teachers) I'm still going to be wfh & homeschooling with the pain of school runs & queuing & explaining to the older one why they can't go yet.

@PyongyangKipperbang

As a parent my thinking is:

• The government has no idea how many kids have had CV or how they transmit it as kids have been for the most part out of circulation since March and are only eligible for testing if they are hospitalised or have a parent who is a keyworkers and displaying symptoms. There could have been hundreds of thousands of kids infected and treated at home with calpol and they are not included in the stats.
• the plans sound miserable, I'm not sending my 5 yr old back so she can be miserable for a few weeks, when she's happy and healthy at home.
• if this government can actually ever get widespread testing then hopefully by September we will actually have a realistic idea of the number of infections rather than this finger in the air guesswork we're doing now.

Me and DH have both been working from home full time since March, we're doing stupid hours, well into the night to get our work done, and as an added bonus my pay has been cut 20% like everyone else in my company to safeguard the finances.

So no, it's not just the well off SAHMs that are concerned about a 1st June return date.

Just worth noting that the ONS study on working age deaths from covid by occupation was released today. (For deaths to 20th April).

Teachers have been less likely to die from covid than the average. True for both men and women.

This despite schools being open fully almost until lockdown and there being no social distancing or PPE when schools were open. Plus schools open for key workers since.

blubellsarebells
It's doesn't just come down to individual risk, we know bus drivers and aecruity guard are at greater risk than anyone else just now. All we can, as individuals and organisations, do, is to assess the risks faved by each organisation and attempt to reduce it and keep it within manageable levels. Having worked in care for many years I understand the risk assessments that are carried out for norml conditions, these will have been updated, but the government failed and employers failed to address the risks early enough and heads went into the sand instead of being proactive. We are not saying we won't go back, we are not saying we won't continue to teach your child and to look after their emotional needs, what we are saying is that we need to ensure it is as safe as it can be to be able to do this for your and every other child.

We are now in a rhythm & reading the guidance (split classes, TAs instead of teachers) I'm still going to be wfh & homeschooling with the pain of school runs & queuing & explaining to the older one why they can't go yet.

And managing how your kids are picking up the anxiety of other kids. And don't understand why they can't be in a class with all their mates (nor even see some of them as they aren't allowed to mix).

The whole situation is one which for some kids will be even more disruptive and difficult than staying home and being homeschooled.

@pipnchops But I don't see what damage waiting until September would do

That comment presumably comes from a place of extreme privilege. I am also lucky to be able to keep my DCs off until September, if we don't feel safe to return. But I absolutely see the HUGE damage that no school and no holiday clubs will do to children at risk stuck for 6 months in unsuitable homes with no outlet and no eyes on them, others who will be stuck in front of a screen, for the only children missing out on vital early year socialising, for the single working parents who might be limping along on furlough with 80% of minimum wage but won't be able to continue working with a young child around full time, for the families who are working in shifts from 6am to 10pm daily to try to work, childcare, housework and homeschool, to the women (it is overwhelmingly women) who will end up quitting their jobs as it's unmanageable.

It's a totally valid argument to still think that it's worth doing it, in order to slow the spread of coronavirus - I don't know, epidemiology is not my area of expertise. But the lack of empathy by the many pps here and on other threads who genuinely 'don't see the damage' is truly astonishing.

I do not lack empathy but yes I probably do speak from a place of privilege but I did say upthread that going back to school should be an option for people who need it most, not a blanket rule for parents who happen to have children of a particular age. What about children in those circumstances who are not in year 6, year 1 or reception?

Stuckforthefourthtime I hear that.

My argument is why should all the kids be going back though?

Additional resources for the kids and parents who DO need that.

And why early years rather than years 3-5, who will both get more bored at home, and probably get more out of school.

My small independent SEN school has remained open with all the children in throughout. We cannot socially distance ourselves from either the children or other members of staff. We wash our hands a lot, we clean and disinfect a lot. We take our temperatures twice a day. We don't wear PPE. We have split into two teams with only one team in each week to reduce staff infection if someone gets sick. At first we were really anxious but now it's just become the norm. We have been lucky enough to not have anyone fall sick although a couple of staff members had to self isolate but both came back after 7 days.