Why are primary schools obsessed with social distancing when it’s not a requirement?

[whenthejoyreturns]

I’m sure I’ll be told I’m stupid but I’m genuinely confused.
Our local primary will only allow 8 in a class because apparently there’s not enough room to socially distance more. I thought dc were supposed to be in bubbles of 15 or so dc. Why have our primaries gone down the route of sitting dc at desks spaced 2m apart?

Having reread that, I will probably now be classed as 'cannot parent'. Lovely.

Lolo I’m pretty sure the medical experts advising the gov know what they’re doing.

The safety measures put in place by the government allows us to operate normally but with groups.

Awww. I don't know whether to laugh or cry at the naivety of this statement.

It IS shit. For everyone.

This has been a farce since the beginning and really we should be moving the blame from schools and teachers for not opening full time to all pupils on 1st June and direct it to the government.

If we had locked down hard and fast like some suggested at the beginning I think we could have potentially 'only' had a max of 20,000 deaths and we could be like New Zealand who seem to be getting back to 'normal' now.

Why? because schools don’t want to reopen and so they’re going to make it looks dystopian as they possibly can, without stopping to think of the absolute wreckage they’re going to plunge our entire economy in if we end up having to keep them closed longer.

My understanding is that schools were shut initially because they thought this virus worked in the same way as a flu pandemic, in which children apparently do act as transmitters of the flu virus.
However as this pandemic has progressed, the evidence is from all the studies that children do not act as transmitters of the covid virus.
No one can ever eliminate all risk. It seems though that the evidence is that the virus is less deadly than flu (but we have vaccinations against flu, so the spread of flu is not as great, and over time, there is a lot of immunity).
I remember the flu pandemic in 1968. I always thought 30,000 died, but just tried to check the figures, and the websute i looked at said 80,000 in the UK.
It is important to know that viruses act differently. I understand that Spanish flu in 1918 affected mainly young people between the ages of 20 and 40.
More is known of this virus as it has progressed, but these things were not known at the beginning.

Yes!

because...

It's the schools who decided to close to all but vulnerable pupils and critical workers.

It's the schools who decided to have a max of 15 pupils per bubble

It's the schools who decided that only 1/2 the year groups should be invited back.

It's the schools who wrote the guidance stating where possible they should maintain social distancing at the same time as stating it isn't necessary.

Oh...hang on...

the absolute wreckage they’re going to plunge our entire economy in

"they're?" What, so it's teachers' fault that Covid struck the globe, is it?

Erm ... PT teacher here. Keyworker kids at my school ARE being asked to social distance and we have procedures in place for this. Obviously it's also far easier to social distance keyworker kids of which there are only 3-4 max at our school ... when we suddenly have whole year groups in then obviously it's harder, hence the "song and dance".

@CallmeAngelina I'd hedge a bet it's your fault actually.

How bloody dare you

Just an idea and I have no idea if it would work in practice but would it help matters across the board if, rather than going back to school after half term there was a summer break at that point? For say a further 3 weeks so 4 weeks total. Then look to restart schools in late June/July and run them through July and August. Perhaps a further short break (maybe a week or so) at the end of August and then back, hopefully as close to normal as possible in September?

Obviously you would keep any reopening subject to the various tests regarding the R value and rates of new infection.

Is there a specific reason that the idea of operating schools over the Summer hasn’t gained more traction?

Yes, teachers unions

Teachers'

Because a minority of vocal teachers are trying to disrupt the return of school children and don't really care about the harm the kids endure from an endless lockdown.

@BertNErnie I’d hope fellow teachers can express themselves in debates without resulting to ‘fuck off’. Doesn’t really get your point across well.

And, yes, for my sins, I am a teacher. Sorry I’m not conforming to the MN teacher norm. But, in real life, many colleagues of mine seem to agree.

@Sunshinegirl82 lots have suggested this but teachers are paid for specific days in a year and changing the contract would be too expensive and time consuming for HR. They don't have"annual leave" that can be moved. However there have been suggestions that Ofsted inspectors will run summer schools to help disadvantaged kids catch up. Let's see what happens there.

Same people around to try to paint this differently, though, when it's been explained time and time again?

You are a maverick teacher. I like you a lot! 🌷🌷

@Changedforthisman

Me too actually and I'm cross with myself for even biting at you but your comment absolutely infuriated me and shows you have a complete lack of understanding in this situation.

If you are a teacher I hope you don't have the chance to be on any SLT with that attitude.

Also I think you seem to forget that whilst staff may be in a union, they are not obligated to follow their union advice. I also think you really must he deluded if you think it's the unions fault or that the union have any say at all on the matter.

So, it’s not a runner because the contracts can’t be redrafted?

My best ever teachers were maverick

Just an idea and I have no idea if it would work in practice but would it help matters across the board if, rather than going back to school after half term there was a summer break at that point? For say a further 3 weeks so 4 weeks total. Then look to restart schools in late June/July and run them through July and August. Perhaps a further short break (maybe a week or so) at the end of August and then back, hopefully as close to normal as possible in September?

I'd be happy to do this and I mooted it on a thread a few weeks ago, but I can imagine some teachers wouldn't be. But, let's face it, we're unlikely to be going anywhere for our summer holidays so why not move them? You'd have the same number of school days and holiday days in this academic year if you did, say, four weeks from this week, then a week say in the middle of July, then a fortnight break at the end of August before children come back to their new year groups in September.

But I don't claim to be knowledgeable enough about how these things work at Local Authority or even school level, so I'm sure there's a myriad of reasons why it won't work. But I've always felt the summer holidays are too long and I'm fortunate I'm in a position where dates can be moved around and it doesn't affect me much (part-time, teacher employed by the local council, non-class based, only currently in school two days a week).

Yes I’m not suggesting teachers work any extra days, just that things are jigged about a bit. I can’t see the issue from a contractual perspective if the parties agree to vary their current contractual relationship.

Why do they need to be jigged about a bit?

Most teachers I know like the holidays as they are.

Sunshine - it’s a good idea. However, the kids are always on their knees by Christmas anyway. That’s coming back in September after a nice long break and then a week in October. If they have been in school through the summer with only a week’s break before starting again in September, then they will be absolutely finished by end of November if not sooner.
Also, many of them have been in school all through. They might like a holiday. Especially as some missed their Easter holiday.
And even if they have been at home, they haven’t been able to do much. Limited time outside, no kicking a football to their mates.

If we can start lifting lockdown, then actually giving them a chance to just be out and playing would be far better for them than sticking them straight back in school. If you are less likely to catch it outdoors, why aren’t we setting up a system where people can meet outdoors so kids can play (because they don’t transmit it, remember?), rather than focussing on Putting them in a classroom ‘to let them socialise?’

I don’t like the fact that everyone is getting very annoyed by children playing in a park together, but insisting it’s fine for them to be in school together. It’s either one or the other. Either they don’t spread it, so why not take them to a park and let them see their best friend, with or without social distancing (because they may not be socially distanced in school in a weeks time) as long as the adults keep their distance. Or they do spread it and it is an issue, in which case don’t take them to school.

Not just children teachers too. Entering flu season with exhausted children and teachers is not a good idea.