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?

Yet another country that has put money into education.

I have spent the last few weeks in budget meetings for schools working out which staff to let go to ensure no deficit budgets. It is absolutely demoralising.

In the 'classes and group sizes' section of the DfE government guidance

"For primary schools, classes should normally be split in half, with no more than 15 pupils per small group and one teacher (and, if needed, a teaching assistant). If there are any shortages of teachers, then teaching assistants can be allocated to lead a group, working under the direction of a teacher. Vulnerable children and children of critical workers in other year groups should also be split into small groups of no more than 15. Desks should be spaced as far apart as possible."

Because they don’t want children back, they think they will be safer at home but they aren’t allowed to say it.

Schools trying to make it sound unpleasant. That is just an awful thing to say. We’ve been in stripping rooms and arranging desks as per the guidance. We’ve found it quite upsetting. It’s not our fault it looks awful. You can’t make a silk purse out of a sow’s ear.

The guidance from UK Gov is acknowledging that 2 meters is not to be expected:

'We know that, unlike older children and adults, early years and primary age children cannot be expected to remain 2 metres apart from each other and staff. In deciding to bring more children back to early years and schools, we are taking this into account.'

However, the guidance also says: 'Where settings can keep children and young people in those small groups 2 metres away from each other, they should do so. '

Clear as proverbial mud.

Ours are going to be in pods of 8; the children don’t need to socially distance but their teacher will. No pods will mix and each pod will be considered a “household”. It sounds well organised.

@Flippetydip

Schools, and particularly the unions, are being criticised because they are chanting "can't can't can't" instead of saying "this is what we can do, let's work with that".

I don't claim to speak for all schools/teachers/human beings, but I can say that my school is saying "This is what we can do. Let's work with that."

What we can do is groups of maximum 10, which allows for social distancing of about 2m apart. We can mark out classrooms and play areas so that social distancing can happen as much as possible. We can invite in Y1, Y6 and R, plus key workers and vulnerable children. We cannot ensure social distancing will happen at all times, but we can try to reduce contact between people who are back in school. These measures are to reduce the risk of spreading the virus in the community, to reduce anxiety in parents who are choosing to send their children back, and to protect the staff.

And yet OP is moaning that we should just not bother with social distancing because they believe the rhetoric that the virus magically doesn't spread between people in schools because it knows how important education is. Unless I've misunderstood OP's point.

Just because we don’t legally have to socially distance (and only because they know that’s not practical for many schools), it doesn’t mean it’s not still hugely beneficial in limiting the spread.

We have 14 year ones back so can split them between two classrooms. If we had more, we’d have larger bubbles but as it stands we can distance pretty well that way whilst still keeping them in friendship groups.

It is sad, and very different, but they’re not in solitary isolation!

We’d be daft to mix larger groups unless we had to.

They know it should be 2 metres but have been told it's impractical in many school. So rather than say keep 2m and have fewer children they have amended the rules.

They don't give a toss about the staff or the children. They want the schools open so they can force people back to work.

Meanwhile their privately educated children will be home until September and are in classes of about 12 anyway.

You'd have to be daft to fall for that. They were prepared to sacrifice nurses, doctors, care workers, bus drivers and now it's the turn of teachers.

I hope the teachers tell them to fuck off and I hope enough parents can see through what is happening but, reading this thread, it seems not.

And as far as I can make out, some of the guidance for schools came out today - it's Friday now, so that leaves errm 5 days for schools to read, interpret and implement the new guidance. No chance. That's not the schools fault, that's the government's fault.

The decision to ask schools to open on June 1st was taken in complete isolation, no education specialist was consulted, there was no discussion about it in parliament, there was no 'we are listening to the head teachers and unions', it was a unilateral declaration. No wonder unions are pissed off.

Bob is in Year 6. He is allocated to Year 6 Bubble A. His sister, Bobina, is in Year 1. She is in Year 1 Bubble A.

Ted is in Year 1 Bubble A as well. His sister, Tedina, is in Reception Bubble A.

None of the bubbles socially distance because apparently that's fine. None of the kids socially distance at home either.

Spot a flaw? All three bubbles are now linked.

If the teachers aren't even trying to socially distance the children, that's possibly 45 children (if bubbles of 15), all of their families, and 3 teachers who could be exposed. At least if schools try to socially distance, the spreading shouldn't be as rampant.

Our school is not beating itself up over social distancing, just sticking closely to the bubbles. The classrooms are small anyway. They seem to be recognising the impact of lockdown and social distancing on the children and focusing on their wellbeing.withon the parameters of the guidelines and logistics of the school's staffing and buildings.

Some teachers and unions.

So the teachers don't die. HTH

And as far as I can make out, some of the guidance for schools came out today - it's Friday now, so that leaves errm 5 days for schools to read, interpret and implement the new guidance. No chance.That's not the schools fault, that's the government's fault.

Letter to parents from a school near me says they have been anticipating opening for some weeks and making plans - details to be relayed to parents today when they receive the government's up to date guidance.

I got the impression that the government is a bit surprised that social distancing will go on in schools. I honestly don't think they gave it a thought.

Brilliant post Beaky

Schools are doing the "this is what we can do" idea that one poster mentioned, it's just that you don't like what they can do.

The reality is that government have made the rules so ambiguous that if a child, or member of staff, dies because they catch COVID19 at school then that school will be held responsible, not government.

I have previously been a school governor and in a situation such as this we would have been following the advice of our LEA. I suspect that many schools will be doing the same, along with any guidance from the liability insurance providers too.

Posters need to remember that even if schools ignored social distancing (which they can't, government have said they need to follow it as best they can) and put 15 students in each class that schools don't have the staff or classrooms to accommodate this. So, even with 15 pupils per bubble, you won't be able to get all students back to school.

Yes, schools will be stark, unfriendly places. Pupils won't be able to play with equipment, won't necessarily be in s bubble with their friends or have their usual teacher - that isn't schools or teachers being mean in order to dissuade pupils from returning. That's the government's response to a pandemic.

@BeakyFace I just read your post and I think you're spot on. Thank you!

Children are as likely to catch it as adults, they are less likely to suffer and die from it but the jury is still out on if they they are as efficient at spreading it.

The jury is still out on all of those things, apart from the actual risk to children.

The evidence base on whether children are as likely to catch it as adults is patchy, often contradictory and full of methodological holes.

Nail on the head @BeakyFace.

0.25% of the population have COVID and R is below 1 so that is continuing to come down. As long as R remains below 1 the numbers will continue to reduce further. The chances of any school having even 1 case of COVID are really very small.

The idea that all schools are going to be ridden with covid from day 1 isn’t realistic.

I have no DC is school so have no skin in this particular game but I don’t find the guidance that contradictory. If you can put the desks a bit further apart then do, if you can’t then don’t. The guidance accepts due to the age of the children it might not be possible. Do the best you can to keep a bit of distance where it’s possible to do so.

The WHO guidance is 1m distancing so rearranging things so there is as much space between everyone as can be sensibly achieved in each school’s individual circumstances seems sensible.

Of course schools aren’t magical virus destroying places but the idea is that if everyone who can SD does so those people will compensate for the people that cannot practically SD in terms of working to keep R down.

It’s not about individual personal protection as I see it but about reducing overall contacts to reduce transmission at a population level.

I understand there will be certain individuals who have personal circumstances that mean extra caution is required and that will need to be considered on a case by case basis.

1st of June was a target only, the figures might not support that date. Realistically though everyone needed time to prepare and something to work towards.

My DS is due to start school in September and this whole thing has made me apprehensive about schools when I was so excited for him before. Not the virus but everything else.

The chances of any school having even 1 case of COVID are really very small.

Medium scale randomised testing seems to indicate that about 1 in 400 people is infected with Covid at the moment.

Given that it is very easy to link 400 people with one another if 100 of them are children in a school (where even with groups of 15, links between the groups via siblings etc will tend to create a network of virus transmission routes that link back into the families of pupils), I think in fact it is extremely likely that a school will have at least 1 person with Covid [ie carrying the virus, even if asymptomatic] within their 'linked community', which can then spread to any other within the 400 via the schoolchildren.

0.25% of the population have COVID and R is below 1 so that is continuing to come down.

R is going up (well, according to the guesstimates from the government). Last week it was estimated to be between 0.5 and 0.9. This week they said between 0.75 and 0.9

@Sunshinegirl82 are you absolutely off your head?

The chances of any school having even 1 case of COVID are really very small.

I work in a school with nearly 400 kids in our Year 10. The chances are NOT small.

Patrick Valance now reporting R of 0.7 - 1. So, perilously close to 1, if not already there.