No longer a national priority to keep schools open

[noelgiraffe]

The government has surreptitiously dropped its priority to keep schools open.

It has replaced it with a priority to “keep education open”.

Remote learning is now a viable alternative to keeping schools open (as opposed to last Monday when it was a matter for the high court).

In the DfE media blog, tweeted earlier today regarding the delayed start to term in January they say:

“ Is this an extension of the Christmas holiday?

No, this isn’t an extension of the holiday and we haven’t asked that the start of term is delayed.

All students will return to education from the first day of term. Secondary school and college students should learn remotely for one week except those in exam years, vulnerable young people and the children of critical workers. It remains our national priority to keep education open and we are not closing education for any period other than during the set holiday periods.”

Interesting development.

@SushiGo

Ahh. Shit. Thanks for the warning.

I too wish the government had put more bloody effort into making schools safer places.

This^^ 100%.

I'm lucky, in that in a SAHP, so it doesn't affect us that badly. I also feel really sorry for teachers, who I feel have been put in the firing line, unfairly, by the government who were sticking their fingers firmly in their ears.

This is going to be very difficult for working parents, especially lone parents. Government owes them appropriate support imo.

My DH is a keyworker FWIW and we definitely wouldn't have been able to send DC to school during lockdown 1. It had to be both at our school.

Well you are one.
Think of others.
They may have a different perspective.

I don’t know what that means? I am one, being concerned about my own situation and representing that here doesn’t mean I don’t think or others, or that I don’t consider they may have a different perspective. I can be empathic towards others while recognising my own position is shit.

@Fortherosesjoni70 the inconsistent provision was unfair. Agree we all need to compromise- some of already have a great deal.
I’m not at all saying other people didn’t have difficulties.

I too wish the government had put more bloody effort into making schools safer places.

Absolutely this

Sushi, if this new strain is so much more infectious I'm not sure what they could do now?

Before yes, masks in class, allow them to wear anything to keep warm, but without blended learning and halfing bodies in classrooms, super strict rules with teeth and back up about mask wearing, super strict hygiene on masks.... I don't see how we could keep them safe?

Pupils are too young to understand the impacts, they still hug, share ear phones, share drinks, pens, stationery, squash together for selfies.... Sit cheek by jowl, sing, close windows whenever teachers backs are turned, throw things... Etc etc etc.

By the very nature of the beast, it's nigh on impossible to effectively keep them sd.

If this new strain proves to be more infectious and just as serious (that bit still unknown) then the whole approach needs to change. Vulnerable and elderly need to shield. Kids and young people cannot take more of the hit.

I think they will need to do the blended learning model.
Classes in school for a bit then at home.
I was set to have 7 children in my class/bubble. We were all set to go then they pulled the plug at the last minute here in Scotland.
Masks for children. They do it in other countries just fine.

@DonnaScozzese

If this new strain proves to be more infectious and just as serious (that bit still unknown) then the whole approach needs to change. Vulnerable and elderly need to shield. Kids and young people cannot take more of the hit.

That could be half the teaching and school staff in that case. Age and medical conditions put so many of the work force into a vulnerable category.

Watching this with interest and some trepidation. If schools move to online learning for more than 3 weeks, I'll have to stop work. I cannot do it again.

I think what people advocating children learning at home forget is that, even for parents who WFH, it means they cannot either work or parent effectively. Children also need more support, not just academically, but also emotionally.

Internet access is also often overlooked. We were lucky enough to be able to purchase an additional device last time but bandwidth in our household just doesn't work for all on online meetings. It'll be the DC who would have to miss out, unfortunately, as we're not going to be able to feed and house them without at least one parent working.

No, I haven't changed my position. We had kids applying to come to the hub during lockdown and we refused them because whilst one parent was a key worker, one wasn't and the child could be at home with the parent. Your blanket policy of allowing all children who only have one key worker parent at home defeats the purpose of closing schools to most kids.

And whilst lots of schools did this in the first lockdown, at least at first, you were going against guidance and making up that rule.

Not all families with one keyworker sent their child in (those with a parent working at home too) sent their child in unnecessarily because most people aren’t dicks (and in fact the numbers were still pretty small) but your school’s own policy had more potential for vulnerable children slipping through the cracks.

I do not recall the wording being “schools”

Always eduction as far as I recall

@ChloeDeckTheHalls

No, I haven't changed my position. We had kids applying to come to the hub during lockdown and we refused them because whilst one parent was a key worker, one wasn't and the child could be at home with the parent. Your blanket policy of allowing all children who only have one key worker parent at home defeats the purpose of closing schools to most kids.

And whilst lots of schools did this in the first lockdown, at least at first, you were going against guidance and making up that rule.

Not all families with one keyworker sent their child in (those with a parent working at home too) sent their child in unnecessarily because most people aren’t dicks (and in fact the numbers were still pretty small) but your school’s own policy had more potential for vulnerable children slipping through the cracks.

Please don't tell me that we were breaking the rules when you live in a different area with different rules. We weren't breaking any rules, and more importantly I am very confident that we have a very good understanding of our children's circumstances. More kids came to us as lockdown continued and they became more vulnerable because we have good relationships with our families. Your comment is insulting to all the people at my school who work so hard to look after the children.

My children’s school, and the school I work at have
had zero transmission since September.

I don’t believe for one moment we have had zero transmission in a tier 3 area (west mids). Very deprived/urban schools in high deprivation areas. A large percentage of parents wouldn’t even bother to get a test for themselves or their children. I’ve heard them at the gates.

but your school’s own policy had more potential for vulnerable children slipping through the cracks.

In fairness the policy around both parents needing to be key workers was set by the local authority - that some schools were able to flex this in individual cases is a strength, not something to criticise them for.

@Jellycatspyjamas

but your school’s own policy had more potential for vulnerable children slipping through the cracks.

In fairness the policy around both parents needing to be key workers was set by the local authority - that some schools were able to flex this in individual cases is a strength, not something to criticise them for.

I guess this stems from my lack of knowledge about Scotland’s approach so I’ll gracefully drop the subject!

DP is a keyworker (police), I'm not, but we were allowed to send our kids in throughout the first lockdown.. they barely missed a day the entire time. Out of a school of 600 there was barely more than 10 kids in any day. It seemed the sensible way to work it.

And beyond the already-announced delay to some secondary years, I really don't think schools will close in Jan, even in tier 4 (where I am)

@ChloeDeckTheHalls I think the different approaches of each government is causing lots of confusion about what is an isn’t allowed in each nation.

@Hellotheresweet

I do not recall the wording being “schools”

Always eduction as far as I recall

We have always been at war with Eastasia.

Yes that’s a verbal comment
But in writing

Any further comment needed? There are many more examples as it has been a mantra of theirs right up till that DfE post yesterday where it changed to keeping education open.

Ds is desperate to be allowed in school the first week back, he is asd & finds working at home a real problem, does all his homework in free periods at school (Y12) to him home is home, school is school.

Doesn’t look like they attached. I know they sometimes appear later.

@Pomegranatespompom

Is this all speculation? I can’t see an official statement.

There’s not going to be an official statement saying they no longer prioritise keeping schools open is there?

But look at their actions. They’ve changed from suing schools who move to online learning while keeping open for keyworkers and vulnerable to implementing that for all schools in England themselves in January.

And the wording on the DfE piece yesterday is a pretty obvious and deliberate change.

This from a pp where is it from? I assume a gov document

Schools and colleges will remain open during term time in Tier 4 areas. The Government will continue to prioritise the wellbeing and long-term futures of our young people. It remains very important for children and young people to attend

Still committed I’d take it over scrutinising a tweet. It is still clear anyway they will not be closed.