Ways to make schools safer without closing them

[noblegiraffe]

Because I am so bored of the misrepresentation and lies going on on this site by people who shout down anyone who raises concerns about the current situation in schools as 'wanting schools to close indefinitely'. The people lacking in imagination who seem to insist that either things carry on as they are (with hundreds of thousands of kids not in school due to the spread in infection), or that schools close and there's nothing in between that can possibly be done to make things safer.

So here's my list, mostly copied from another thread:

We could start with an effective test and trace system, which we were told was essential for the safe re-opening of schools, but we opened without.

We could move onto making sure that all classrooms have windows. And then that those windows open. A national WEAR A VEST campaign to stop parents and kid complaining that it's cold. Germany have just invested a large amount of money in improving ventilation in schools, the UK should follow them.

Masks. Why do the government keep insisting they're not needed in corridors (from the comfort of a socially distanced parliament) and that it's impossible to use them in classrooms when the rest of the world seem to manage? What lessons can we learn from the international experience?

Marquees/covers on the playgrounds so that kids aren't inside for wet break. I know that wet break caused a whole year group to be sent home in a local school as it was uncontrolled indoor close contact.

For it to be mandatory (not simply 'where possible') that classrooms are arranged so that teachers are 2m from the kids when teaching. If smaller class sizes are needed to facilitate this, then solutions must be found even if the government needs to pay money for bigger spaces.

Parents to be supported/sanctioned to avoid kids being sent into school with symptoms or when they're supposed to be isolating.

The government to update its list of symptoms for children requiring a test to include the main ones that children experience, instead of the adult symptoms which they mainly don't.

Regular testing in schools, particularly when there are outbreaks, to enable more effective isolation.

Vulnerable kids to be allowed the option of staying at home. Schooling could be provided by Oak Academy (why spend millions on it and not use it?) and the army of 'catch-up tutors' to provide feedback on work (or ECV teachers also permitted to stay at home)

Any other suggestions?

@ohthegoats

Are you or are you not arguing that ECV children being at home would free up space to create a 2 metre zone for the teacher? Are you or are you not arguing that their current school passes over responsibility for their education?

I read the OP. I don't think anyone is 'arguing'. It suggests that if ECV children want to stay at home, and are able to stay at home (which they currently aren't 'allowed' to without fines), then they should be able to. In addition to this obviously being safer for the child, it would have the added benefit of adding to safety measures in school by making classes smaller.

The OP also suggested that ECV teachers could work from home. These teachers, of which there are plenty, could be tasked with remote schooling of children who are ECV too. This would enable there to be a community of children and teachers receiving education that is professional, and is as safe as it can be. It's not perfect for the child from a social perspective, but it's better than the alternative.

Responsibility for the education of children who are isolating lots of times, ECV, home due to ECV parents, home due to anxiety etc is very tricky to sort out as an issue for all schools. While schools and teachers are held accountable for the progress of children who aren't there, this is going to be a problem. The DfE needs to decouble those issues really.

Any child who was on the shielding list is allowed to stay off school "where individual clinical advice not to do so has been provided".

It's a different issue to:

• children who are more at risk (either previously shielding, or in a higher risk category)
• children of around 350,000 parents who are ECV
• children in families where people in the household are higher risk but not ECV

If all those children were to stay at home, yes, that would certainly free up some classroom space, but at what cost? I don't think we should see them deregistering, or effectively reregistering by having their education transferred to Oak Academy, as a part of the solution. We need to prioritise measures which make it same for this large proportion of children to be in school.

Especially if parents don’t play ball and don’t get kids tested when they think the kid has it/send them in with symptoms/get them tested and send them in while waiting on results.

That's certainly not the case for my school but obviously that's school dependent.

I would bloody love it for schools to be safe enough for vulnerable kids to attend. Obviously that would be the first choice.

But given shielding advice was basically to not leave the house, I don’t see how it can be achieved in a school situation.

Especially when it relies on the correct behaviour of so many others.

@noblegiraffe

I would bloody love it for schools to be safe enough for vulnerable kids to attend. Obviously that would be the first choice.

But given shielding advice was basically to not leave the house, I don’t see how it can be achieved in a school situation.

Especially when it relies on the correct behaviour of so many others.

What do you mean by "vulnerable kids"? (I know you mean clinically vulnerable, but which group are you talking about?)

@baller20

Especially if parents don’t play ball and don’t get kids tested when they think the kid has it/send them in with symptoms/get them tested and send them in while waiting on results.

That's certainly not the case for my school but obviously that's school dependent.

How do you know? I mean really know?

It’s not the sort of thing they will be advertising.

What do you mean by "vulnerable kids"? (I know you mean clinically vulnerable, but which group are you talking about?)

I’m not a medical expert? I think if there are genuine concerns about the risk of the child being in school, either to them or to family members, there should be a discussion and an alternative.

I really don’t think there’s any point in any discussion that mixes primary and secondary. They are such different environments with such different needs even before considering that the virus doesn’t spread in the under 10/11/12s in the same way as 12+.

We've had one case & one bubble having to isolate since March & that was during the return pre Summer. If parents were regularly sending Covid carrying kids in i'm pretty sure there would be more cases, don't you think. My neighbour drove to Birmingham to get a test as she was unsure.

@baller20 - well, cases rates are increasing in pretty much every community around the country, even in tier 1 areas, so some people clearly are carrying covid about, don’t you think? Why would schools be different?

@noblegiraffe

What do you mean by "vulnerable kids"? (I know you mean clinically vulnerable, but which group are you talking about?)

I’m not a medical expert? I think if there are genuine concerns about the risk of the child being in school, either to them or to family members, there should be a discussion and an alternative.

I think you should look into it a bit more before suggesting that these “vulnerable” children are sent off to work at home

@Walkaround did I say people weren't carrying covid? I simply replied to a question about how I know they aren't a load of covid carrying children in my dcs school. I also know the community & parents well & surprisingly we discuss these things (over zoom, whatsapp before anyone panics!)

how I know they aren't a load of covid carrying children in my dcs school

Without a robust testing regime it’s actually completely impossible to know this.

I think you should look into it a bit more before suggesting that these “vulnerable” children are sent off to work at home

Maybe you should go on the MN threads where parents want it and give them the benefit of your superior opinion.

@baller20 - but unless all children are regularly tested, you don’t know, do you?

This is what the OP put Especially if parents don’t play ball and don’t get kids tested when they think the kid has it/send them in with symptoms/get them tested and send them in while waiting on results.

I know it's highly unlikely that parents in my dcs school are not sending in children that they think have it.

I also know the community & parents well & surprisingly we discuss these things

All of them? That must be massively time consuming.

But you are lucky if you know for sure that everyone is strictly abiding by the rules in your DC school because it’s not happening elsewhere.

So number of cases or lack of children having to self isolate doesn't provide any indication? The school strongly encourages tests if they have suspicions & parents are keen to oblige imo.

The point about "clinically vulnerable" children and families is a really important one, because it is such a huge population if you look at higher risk. Within every classroom there will be children who have a parent with type one or type two diabetes, with hypertension, who has had cancer treatment in past, who has rheumatoid arthritis or who is obese, has asthma or copd, is older or has severe mental illness. Who have a sibling with Down syndrome, or a grandparent living with them who is older. Even the parents who are fit and well may experience long covid. They may be carers or medical professionals who are working with more vulnerable people. It's simply not possible to make this about "shielding" the vulnerable. A lot of the conversation about this has been about protecting teachers, and that's incredibly important, but just as we need to act as if anyone might be transmitting CV19, we need to act as if anyone is vulnerable to it. Because they are.

So number of cases or lack of children having to self isolate doesn't provide any indication?

No. A kid told me the other day they were sure they had Covid at the start of term but didn’t get a test because they didn’t fancy it.

There weren’t any positive tests in that group at the time so maybe they got away with it and didn’t spread it or or maybe they weren’t positive but that doesn’t mean they didn’t break the rules.

All of them? That must be massively time consuming

Why would it be time consuming. How do you know the size of the school or how many classes I have dc in? My neighbours are pretty much all at the same school. I grew up in the vicinity as did many of my neighbours/school parents. Tbh pre covid it was exhausting that everyone knew each other's business, it's useful now!

My DCs schools (primary and secondary) are doing everything they can to keep the kids learning. Even when we have needed to self isolate the contact between school and gone has been wonderful.
However I strongly believe it is the behaviour of people outside of school that is causing the sharp increase. Kids are still meeting up in large groups on the streets and in the parks, with kids that are not in their bubbles. There is so much mixing going on outside of education the poor schools don’t stand a chance. We are t3 ffs!

No. A kid told me the other day they were sure they had Covid at the start of term but didn’t get a test because they didn’t fancy it.

Not sure why that's relevant, I already said it will depend on the school/community. I have to disagree with you, I think if the school was infected by loads of ill children we would have had confirmed/suspected cases since Sept as I don't believe my children's school is only attended by people who are magically asymptotic or unaffected by Covid.

Sorry I forgot to add a suggestion... people need to be brought on board with the stricter regulations. Or actually start penalising people who are blatantly going against them.

However I strongly believe it is the behaviour of people outside of school that is causing the sharp increase.

I definitely think there is an element to this. Everyone I know is still remote working, doesn't depend on public transport & personally I've been very strict outside of school. My dad who lives around the corner is very vulnerable. Our local high street have also taken it really seriously, traffic light system etc. The vast majority of people I see are masked up.

Not sure why that's relevant

You said it would lack of cases and bubbles bursting was evidence that people were following the rules. I said not necessarily and provided an example of rule breaking that didn’t lead to positive tests or burst bubbles.