Schools analogy

[2X4B523P]

I have been offered two jobs, both starting in September and both in the same role. The first is full time hours but on a temporary contract, perhaps for only for a couple of weeks but almost certainly less than six. The second is part time hours but on a permanent contract.

Which of these would be the best position to accept?

Don't know but think you need to ask for your thread title to be rewritten, it doesn't make sense?

Hope you get good advice!

You also need to explain your financial circumstances, ie how much do you need a reliable income?

I think the poster is trying to say would we prefer our kids back at school full time but not for very long or part time but for much longer.

Ah, I see! Clever. Obviously the latter. Though I’m not sure how, um, your parents would manage their full time jobs if you only worked part time?!

I would reject both jobs offers and go self employed. Mainly WFH but with option to work at multiple different offices as and when suits. Also has the advantage of being part-time hours but for full-time pay

Obviously the latter, but I'd also take on additional temp jobs that fit the pt hours !

Definitely the part -time offer. It will give me some stability and I will be able to plan from there. Also it’s more flexible option - I can do what I want in my spare time.

Disclaimer: My DD has additional needs and needs tailored approach.

I see what you did here OP and this is exactly what I’ve been thinking.

I’d go for the part time hours which would allow me to reliably plan my working hours around the kids knowing that a safer smaller bubble would lead to less school closures.

I could be tempted to go for full time but when that leads to me erratically and frequently needing more time off to watch my kids, well my employers/clients would grow sick of me.

If the government understood this and provided clear messaging to employers and some kind of part time furlough scheme it could work.

Kids get their education part time do their progress is still being monitored and they still have social interaction

The risks are halved. Schools close far less. The spread is restricted.

Parents get support to a logical part time scheme for the terms ahead.

Kids know where they stand and have a routine.

Far better for kids, parents and employers than the stop start closing of schools.

Why do you think almost certainly less than 6? I don't accept that it's almost certain at all.

Are your children in year 10 like mine? If so, neither will do.

This doesn’t make any sense at all

1. Why do you think schools would certainly be closer within 6 weeks? Any closure wouldn’t be permanent anyway - they would reopen within a matter of days or 2 weeks at most

1. Why would there be zero chance of schools closing if they were there on a part time basis? Presuming this is half the children in at a time to allow some pretence of social distancing, there would still be some outbreaks. There would also be staff who were in full time, meaning they were mixing across bubble

Thanks for the replies everyone. Of course I am not suggesting that part time schooling would guarantee they stay open throughout but would give more chance of stability than what is currently proposed.

There's lots of conflicting evidence on how children and school environments spread the virus but more lean towards them being super spreaders than not. If the former then I can see a chaotic first term with lots of on off closures and a sharply rising national case load. Come October half term I fear that there could be another national closure which could run through to Easter, when the weather starts improving.

Should things tick along nicely with part timing then this can be gradually increased whilst watching the numbers carefully and tapering back off if needed but hopefully avoiding the chance of prolonged closures.

WTF

Why do this? Why make shit up to discuss the schools opening/closing/part time stuff again.

Just why?

I have a child who has struggled with school attendance due to anxiety. I would love wfh option especially as dh was shielding and by September we could both be as we are both over 50 with pre existing conditions.

Umm but it doesn’t work since it’s not the same “job” you are applying for. To extend you analogy Will you have to do the same work in the part time hours as in the full time job? Have they managed to streamline the role to make it a genuine part time role for you? I can accept part time schooling if we cut the curriculum (Can we do that? Is there enough deadwood in it? I sense an awful lot of the grammar from the primary school curriculum could go but secondary? I guess we would have to loose full subjects!)

otherwise In your situation our kids will be left with one of those part time jobs that is part time hours but full time work load. Many of us with experience of a part time role have experience of how stressful that can be!!

If schools go part-time there will need to be some form of remote learning in the week they are not physically in school.

DS’s school is setting up webcams in the classrooms so lessons can be watched from home if students can’t physically be in class.

Should things tick along nicely with part timing then this can be gradually increased whilst watching the numbers carefully and tapering back off if needed but hopefully avoiding the chance of prolonged closures

My oldest child is just going into year 11. Ofqual have proposed not removing any content from the GCSE’s, just a few practical elements. DS has had mostly holding activities since March, no new content from the school except in one subject.

So neither option is any good, as neither will allow him enough time to cover all the content to get good grades at gcse.

more lean towards them being super spreaders than not
That is not true. There is some new evidence on a few more events of children catching it, but all peer reviewed research so far shows they are less likely to spread it, especially under 10s.

@MRex

*more lean towards them being super spreaders than not* That is not true. There is some new evidence on a few more events of children catching it, but all peer reviewed research so far shows they are less likely to spread it, especially under 10s.

.... Exactly People shouldn't seize on a couple of alarmist articles, any more than a couple of articles claiming kids never spread it

The data that is available strongly indicates that most of the infections in schools were collateral damage from community infections,
not the driver of infections.

Schools will open in September, full time for all students.

But we will 'pay'for it with losing other things, and looking at what is happening in local lockdowns, we won't be able to visit others at home. Everyone will have a school/work bubble. Social distancing and masks in public places. The economy keeps trundling along and schools are open. Just no visiting between households which is where they are tracking the outbreaks to.

The part time works fine for DS2 who is in Year 5, however I’m a TA so does your analogy mean that I’m still in full time? If so then who will look after the children of all the TA’s and Teachers?

My older son is about to go into Y11, like another poster said there have been no special considerations made for them so he needs to go to school full time in order to attempt to pass his GCSE’s next year. If the government are planning on part time then they need to plan for serious changes to next years GCSE’s.

I'm not at all convinced that part-time schooling is significantly lower risk than full-time though. So you could just end up with part-time school for a maximum of 6 weeks rather than full-time.

I think the op’s thinking is that with half a class at a time they will be socially distanced so less infection. And if a child gets ill only 15 children will miss school for two weeks instead of 30 so that halved the likelihood of children being sent home for two weeks.

If part time was a plan it’d provide stability with a set remote learning plan for the rest of the time. As children would be in half the time the remote learning would be easier and more motivated than full time remote learning.

It could work if It was well thought out and backed by government funding.

By halved I mean lowered to around half not exactly halved before someone jumps on me. I know it’s not an exact science.

Part time schooling does not work for many reasons

1. Teachers will still need to be in full time looking after the other half of the school when one half is off, thus mixing bubbles anyway
2. Is it part time education too? Or are we expecting teachers to teach full time and provide home learning aswell as classroom and be available to both home and classroom children at the same time
3. What happens to key worker children? Who looks after them the other half of the week whilst their parents are helping the country keep going? There will be more key worker children needing places if they now stay full time (some will of had a parent on furlough or wfh and not took up an original KW place)
4. If you have more than 1 child that are in school at different days and times that becomes a logistical nightmare for many working parents
5. Bubbles will still be sent home to isolate if there's a positive test so it's not guaranteed part time will be continuous without any short term class closures

Part time school is a good idea in theory just not practical in reality