School re-opening under threat

[jomartin281271]

Headline in the London Evening Standard today that this new surge could threaten re-opening of schools. I'm not surprised. The government know that it's not safe to open schools under their current guidance. Cramming children, teachers and admin staff into those tiny spaces could cause a catastrophe. I feel sorry for teachers. Most of them are really committed to the job and their lives are being put at risk. Scary times.
www.standard.co.uk/news/health/coronavirus-second-wave-schools-september-a4511516.html

@TrustTheGeneGenie Perhaps it should have been but it wasn't.

The figures state there were outbreaks in schools when very limited years returned.
They have been off school a long time yes but if they don't go with the part time option - at least initially, then it is possible that schools will close again causing more disruption to education. Part time may be an inconvience but if done right it need (hopefully) only be for a short while, rather than stopping & starting which we are looking at.

But if schools, or at least year groups will have to be starting and stopping all the time, it is the core education that will be damaged.

Lua I believe that pp was talking about part time provision so not much interruption -if we do by what has happened since June 1st. Plus I’d rather we educate in school and swap to Oak if necessary than use school as childcare type situation. By far.

@TheHoneyBadger

Whoever made the wet fish comment, even if it’s been deleted, I love you for it It was a little bit of light in the darkness. May common sense and compassion always exist and speak out however much of a minority concern they become.

It hasn't been and you are most welcome

There is no question that kids above 10 do trasmit the virus. The debate are for younger kids.

But you suggest there is no risk....boldly stating that there is no evidence.

If you firmly believe that there is no evidence after all this time but still want precautions then you are not so confident in your statement and said it to antagonise.

Schools have remained open in Sweden and yet there has not been reports of all hell breaking loose

Actually there are reports of outbreaks in schools in Sweden but they have - seemingly deliberately - not monitored or tested much. www.sciencemag.org/news/2020/05/how-sweden-wasted-rare-opportunity-study-coronavirus-schools.

Also, Swedish class sizes are way below English ones - so social distancing is much better, inherently, in their schools.

Also Sweden has a far higher mortality rate than comparable countries which have been more precautionary.

When a nurse catches Covid, we assume it’s from his place of work.
A bus driver, ditto
A supermarket worker, ditto
A warehouse worker, ditto
That is why we all clapped. For the heroes.
A teacher catches Covid? They could have caught it anywhere but their place of work. (And no, teachers haven’t spent 6 months at home, schools have been open to key workers’ children throughout)
Do people not see they are tying themselves in knots to try to stick to this belief that schools are the only indoor public setting untouched by Covid?

@TrustTheGeneGenie

there's no evidence that they aren't

Mmmm I don't think that's true. There's plenty of evidence to suggest that children aren't the super spreaders they were once thought to be.

A mask doesn't protect the wearer so teachers wearing PPE doesn't help them, though I don't have anything against it if that's what they want.

I think masks on children is counter productive. They'll mess around more, touch their faces more etc. I just personally don't think it would help whatsoever.

Yes you could social distance if you part time school but realistically part time school isn't sufficient.

A mask doesn't protect the wearer so teachers wearing PPE doesn't help

This may come as a shock to you but teachers have these people called colleagues. These colleagues are adults who we know can transmit the virus if they have it. If they wear a mask they lessen the chance of them passing the virus on. This reduces the risk for their adult colleagues. Is that simple enough for you to understand ?

This large epidemiological study says that the age group 10-19 is more likely to spread the virus within a household than adults.

www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2020/07/20/children-10-transmit-new-coronavirus-easily-adults-south-korea/

So this age range includes the final couple of years of primary school in this country.

Napqueen1234
But everyone else has had to go back to work,

Except for those still furloughed and all the workers that boris is moaning about WFH.

Devlesko
I don't see why school can't just be online and those that want childcare can pay childminders.
It's not rocket science.
The childminders could assist with schoolwork.

Why not use the BBC resources instead and get rid of schools completely. There is an organisation in Kent that is providing free online maths and English 60 minute lessons 4 days a week during the school holidays. They are over subscribed. Perhaps this is the way forward if you are suggesting a schools should be online only. Would save billions in government funding.

@Kitcat122

Alex it requires 2 in the bubble to test positive within 14 days and presumably they don’t have to/possibly aren’t allowed to inform parents or teachers until there’s a second positive test so it will be given plenty of time to freely spread in a bubble before any closure.

This 😡

I’m so confused by this year group bubble bollocks.

Siblings. Every bubble is already contaminated (for want of a better word!) by siblings.

A mask doesn't protect the wearer

Well scientists at UC Davies would disagree www.ucdavis.edu/coronavirus/news/your-mask-cuts-own-risk-65-percent/

Now I don't know if this is true. I know there's a lot of conflicting data out there. There is still much we don't know.

But the thing is, in most circumstances, wearing a mask won't hurt anyone (granted there are a tiny minority who can't) and it will be protective of others and quite possibly of self too - so why not?

It is stupid advice isn't it?

I have a family with a sibling in every bubble in the school!

Plus kids have to isolate for 7 days and then can come back in but family have to isolate for 14...so who the hell brings the kid to school at the end of day 7 if the family can't go out?

• I’m so confused by this year group bubble bollocks.

Siblings. Every bubble is already contaminated (for want of a better word!) by siblings.*

It's to distract from the fact that the world-beating Track and Trace is still not working.

@mccavitythethird there's no need to be rude?

I've already said I have nothing against it?

@IloveJKRowling

A mask doesn't protect the wearer

Well scientists at UC Davies would disagree www.ucdavis.edu/coronavirus/news/your-mask-cuts-own-risk-65-percent/

Now I don't know if this is true. I know there's a lot of conflicting data out there. There is still much we don't know.

But the thing is, in most circumstances, wearing a mask won't hurt anyone (granted there are a tiny minority who can't) and it will be protective of others and quite possibly of self too - so why not?

Arguably children aren't going to wear them properly and that could hurt somebody. I have no issue with adults wearing them if they want to.

@Coffeeandbeans - genuine questions. Let's pretend that research has finally caught up and there is strong evidence that 10 to 19 year olds are transmitting the virus like any other adult. That would mean a high school classroom with 30 students and teachers going across them is completely unsuitable and worst than a pub set-up. Then what? is the government no longer responsible for education? Why is it that if it is clear that we need more space and perhaps support through online, that we need to buy this from some provider?

@walker1891

But you suggest there is no risk....boldly stating that there is no evidence.

If you firmly believe that there is no evidence after all this time but still want precautions then you are not so confident in your statement and said it to antagonise.

No evidence doesn't equal no risk. I never claimed it did. Hth.

Peer reviewed, published in the gold standard of journals: Nature.

A scientific report proving SARS-CoV-2 is airborne.

www.nature.com/articles/s41598-020-69286-3

Not sure how anyone can rationally argue against masks in schools or any setting after this.

@uniglowooljumper Scotland has been following an elimination approach. Check their infection rate out. They have done brilliantly. Well done to them.

No evidence doesn't equal no risk. I never claimed it did. Hth

That is true...so you said it for no reason at all then I assume. You do believe there is a risk that requires precautions so a pointless statement to make.

[quote Rhianna1980]@uniglowooljumper Scotland has been following an elimination approach. Check their infection rate out. They have done brilliantly. Well done to them.[/quote]
True, but the border is open. There's no force field around Scotland, travel between there and hotspots in England is allowed.

@Coffeeandbeans

*Devlesko I don't see why school can't just be online and those that want childcare can pay childminders. It's not rocket science.* The childminders could assist with schoolwork.

Why not use the BBC resources instead and get rid of schools completely. There is an organisation in Kent that is providing free online maths and English 60 minute lessons 4 days a week during the school holidays. They are over subscribed. Perhaps this is the way forward if you are suggesting a schools should be online only. Would save billions in government funding.

Because schools are not, and should not, be one size fits all. Even when teaching online teachers can address the issues faced by students which cannot happen with off the peg purchased systems.

[quote TrustTheGeneGenie]@mccavitythethird there's no need to be rude?

I've already said I have nothing against it?[/quote]
You may not have anything against it but you seemed to be struggling to understand it.