Government removes statement schools are not considered "high risk settings" in guidance.

[IloveJKRowling]

Reported in the TES

www.tes.com/news/Covid-dfe-cuts-schools-arent-high-risk-line-guidance

From the article:
"The government has removed a paragraph from its Covid guidance stating that schools are not considered "high risk settings".

The Department for Education (DfE) previously stated in its guidance for schools that Public Health England (PHE) and the Department of Health and Social Care (DHSC) advise that schools are not considered high risk work environments, and it is "therefore appropriate for teachers and other school staff to return to their workplace setting".

But following an update to the guidance today, this detail has vanished."

@Whatshouldicallme

Personally I would reintroduce shielding on a funded basis alongside the current measures. I think it’s madness that vulnerable DC and adults are being expected to attend school and work as normal.

However, lockdown would lead to more harm than good in terms of the poverty, homelessness and suicides etc it would cause.

This is a straw man argument.

Nice to see you being open, but I think you should put that at the start of every post. I'm always surprised how long people will stay on the merry-go-round.

strawman > falsehoods challenged > non-sequiteur > even sillier straw man so the conversation moves on

I think people are daft to keep replying. Just ignore him and he'll get bored and pop over to FWR to argue that women's sports are discriminatory or something.

@Spiralsand

I don't think the remote provision provided throughout the summer term was adequate, and I don't think the full time "as usual except for the hundreds of thousands of children in self isolation" provision now is adequate, either.

I think the government need to invest in to provide a proper education to children. Additional teachers/TAs and spaces to allow for smaller class sizes and SD. Technology and internet access for students who need it. Proper ventilation assessments and alteration in schools where appropriate. Adequate testing for all staff and students to monitor the actual levels of spread within individual schools and proper test & trace. This is all being done in other countries whilst our kids have been sent back in with some hand gel and a prayer.

Why are so many people happy with "better than nothing at all?"

@Ecosse

As has been pointed out to you in numerous other threads, it's not possible or practical to shield everyone in society who would need it long term.

If educating the masses is such a priority to you, why not prioritise putting some of the measures you so advocate (social distancing, for example) in schools?

We need to make education better and safer. We could do it, if enough people wanted. We could use the space that is not is use, everywhere that we can. We could put more lessons on line. We could roll out tech to kids who don't have it. There could be jobs in that. Smaller bubbles. More TAs. And home learning for anyone who can. We could support each other to get through this.

We really could. Still.

@Whatshouldicallme

I know you can’t just the vulnerable and get on with it. That’s why I’d be happy to retain existing measures like the rule of six alongside shielding.

@Ecosse

But as I'm sure you've noticed, the rule of six isn't working. The virus is still spreading exponentially. So you are essentially saying "let it spread and shield the vulnerable." Except as you yourself have pointed out, that isn't practical.

And again, if education is a priority, why not invest in measures to mitigate spread in schools?

@herecomesthsun

We need to make education better and safer. We could do it, if enough people wanted. We could use the space that is not is use, everywhere that we can. We could put more lessons on line. We could roll out tech to kids who don't have it. There could be jobs in that. Smaller bubbles. More TAs. And home learning for anyone who can. We could support each other to get through this.

We really could. Still.

Thread for ideas here: www.mumsnet.com/Talk/coronavirus/4059472-Ways-to-make-schools-safer-without-closing-them

@Whatshouldicallme

The rule of six is working- the infection rate is coming down.

But given that COVID is not the only risk we face, we cannot ignore the significant health and economic harms caused by lockdown.

@Ecosse

As I'm sure you know, the r number is still greater than 1, so cases are still increasing exponentially.

No one is talking about a lockdown.

If education is a priority, why not increase funding and resources for schools so that they can operate more safely ?

Just on BBC news: Covid-19: Schools may need to close to some year groups, former adviser warns (from Prof Neil Ferguson)

www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-54673558

I saw that too motherrunner

Our school has been remarkably unaffected by Covid, only 3 staff positive (not sure about the number of kids tbh). Most schools near us have loads of cases and year groups off.

Not sure who we send home? Primary kids being sent home means parents can’t go out to work.
In secondary would parents of year 7s happily leave them at home???

Year 11s are clearly capable of being left at home safely but they have exams in May/June. Do they need to be in? It’s such a mess.

@Ecosse

Its good to se that you are still posting the comedy whilst ignoring

the the government refused
to put extra money into schools
let them open on a rota
use buildings that were closed
to reduce class sizes.
to admit that that children/teenagers (11+) could spread the virus

and many more

But in your deluded view its the schools, teachers and unions.

Not sure who we send home?

In secondaries, I'd do it in this order: 8/9, 7, 10/12, 11/13.

Primaries, I'd probably do all or nothing