Can we unlock the schools at start of Feb?

[MeandT]

I'm totally supportive of the lockdown BUT by the end of next week, case numbers nationally will be the same as they were at end of November. Hospital admissions are falling again.

Rather than going back into tiers with the shops and food pubs open (where all the spreading happened in December), can we not issue all the teachers with N95 masks (and vaccines for the clinically vulnerable), make all the kids wear triple layer face masks all the time, and just get on with the important job of educating this country's kids in person? Starting again 1st of Feb.

AIBU to ask if we can send the kids back as soon as we hit the case rate we unlocked at on 2nd December?

IABU= no way, the cases will shoot up too quickly again, even if they all wear masks all day.

IANBU = yes, get them back before half term, the only reason it went nuts in December was because everyone was out Christmas shopping and seeing family.

[quote CallmeAngelina]@2fallsagain, "That doesn't really help. You can't say something is bullshit and then not reference how or why. I'm not saying you are not right but if you are going to challenge the evidence given to the committee then it's helpful to back it up rather than just say "they don't know their arse from their elbow. I'm not following every detail and I don't tend to venture on to these threads."

Well, if you had ventured onto these threads more often, you might know that @noblegiraffe is famous on them for endlessly providing statistics and links to reputable articles. Regardless, she has still endured a lot of abuse and shit from people who are determined to stick their fingers in their ears and shout 'lalalala,' as it doesn't fit with their preferred narrative.[/quote]
So, I am an infrequent poster on this board who doesn't know who anyone is and I asked a perfectly reasonable question and that's the response I get. How do I know who is or who isn't getting abuse.

I think my first instinct to stay away from these boards as they are pretty toxic was right.

The only good that vaccinating teachers would do is to relieve one part of the stress and worry about catching the virus themselves through work. And not many people give a shit about that as, to be fair, many people have similar concerns (regardless of the actual comparative likelihoods of it happening).
The issue is the children acting as 'vectors of transmission.' If we want to reduce spread, schools have to remain closed, and I would venture to suggest that that also means reducing the crazy numbers of children currently attending.

[quote smogsville]@MarshaBradyo although some people have mentioned other stuff if would be useful to learn, overhauling the way some stuff is taught and I'm not against that. It's not that I think the curriculum is perfect atm more that you never know which little nugget of a subject is going to catch your little treasure's imagination and set them off on the path to greatness, do you (this is an attempt at lightheartedness!). What I am quite confident about is that home school for most is an unsuitable substitute.[/quote]
Smog I’m fairly ok with curriculum. I know it gets a bad rap sometimes but I didn’t go to school here and can’t see U.K. curriculum as any worse than what I had. It has even more than I had in some cases, which I like.

And totally agree about spark of imagination. Keep it all in imo

@2fallsagain That doesn't really help. You can't say something is bullshit and then not reference how or why. I'm not saying you are not right but if you are going to challenge the evidence given to the committee then it's helpful to back it up

Oh you actually wanted to know why it was bullshit? You asked instead 'where is this reported?'

I don't know if it has been reported anywhere, I would expect not. The media are shit on education and covid. I don't know it's bullshit because I read a report, I know it's bullshit because I read what they are saying and know it's bullshit.

I found a twitter thread breaking it down if that's any use: twitter.com/karamballes/status/1351631020689416195?s=21

What I meant was "where has it been reported that this is bullshit". Sorry for not being clear enough. I will look at the thread. Really no need for the aggression from some posters though.

The 1 February is only 10 days away.
I can't see numbers being low enough.

In my area November was a really tough time and schools were really at the brunt of it. In October/November 3/4 of the staff at my school caught covid. I was ill enough to need hospital treatment. I'm CV but had been working with no protection and no social distancing with almost 300 young children and staff a week.

I'm CV but don't see myself getting the vaccine any time soon. Although in Yorkshire, where are apparently ahead of schedule, my local surgery is still only up to the over 80s. They haven't started on the over 70s or CEV yet, let alone being near starting on the CV.

How nobody has noticed that all the other countries are operating normally while we struggle I don’t know

This is simply not true.
There are places in America where schools haven't been in since March.
Most of the larger/busier countries in Europe have restrictions including within their schools.

Everybody caught it somewhere, so why not tell us all where the highest risks are?

Because the data relies in people stating where they have been themselves and who they've been in contact with.
So it's difficult to have any reliable information and often it simply isn't known.

And there are still a lot of people out there who,refuse to believe others when they state where they most likely caught it.

I have posted a number of times that I most likely caught covid from school. It was the only place I had prolonged close contact with any other people, behind my household. My household had no symptoms and no positive tests before or after my having covid. 3/4 of our staff caught covid. Most of us had restricted close contact with any other people outside of work, and we were not in close contact with one another - staff room, etc not being used. I have still been told from MNetters that I probably caught it from a supermarket or from my asymptomatic dh, who does work out of the house. This is despite me not being at a shop and dh not testing positive, nor being with anyone who'd had covid symptoms.

People simply don't want to believe that schools can be places of transmission, and that children can and do catch covid and spread it, just as much as adults. This has been shown to be the case in numerous occasions in more recent months.

I blame this outlook, however, on the government's initial insistence that children don't get covid or spread it, and their constant mantra that 'schools are safe' despite data showing a different story increasingly.

A staggered approach would make sense with reception and year 1 going first after half term. These are the ages that seem less affected and the ones that are hardest to have at home when trying to work.

@Billi77

A staggered approach would make sense with reception and year 1 going first after half term. These are the ages that seem less affected and the ones that are hardest to have at home when trying to work.

But also the ones who will have the most time to catch up on learning, if this is based on children 'needing to be in education.' 4 and 5 year olds have years ahead of them to catch up on English and maths.

Is it the need for education or the need for parents to work which is to be the biggest priority?

If it is need for education then it should be those in exam years - years 10-13, followed by those in transition years such as year 6 and 9.

Reception and year 1 only makes sense really if the priority is parents needing to,work, taking the priority away from education needs.

And although the younger children are less likely to be ill with covid and are often more likely to be asymptomatic, they also are the ones where social distancing is near on impossible and where masks are more of an issue, and where contact with teachers/school contact with parents is increased.

@Billi77

A staggered approach would make sense with reception and year 1 going first after half term. These are the ages that seem less affected and the ones that are hardest to have at home when trying to work.

With over 20% of primary students in and in many schools a lot more. That’s an average. Staggered starts in primary are no longer possible in the way they were in June. Too many children in school.

As much as I personally like the idea of exam year and year 6 I do think that learning through play is part of what makes early years going back important. Over and above the work element.

It’s also the age group who are least likely to do independent learning.

@trying22432
"Masks are useless in this case and are causing other health problems. Definitely not good for kids to wear 6 hrs in school.*"
@EmmanuelleMakro
"This.
No science behind it (dentist studies showed this) /sheer superstition."

These are quite the statements! Please can you share a link to the dentist studies you quote which (apparently?) show masks are useless at reducing airborne viral particle transmission and that there is no science behind their use?

9 decades of use in hospital operating theatres suggest otherwise!

Not to mention plenty of research globally by the WHO, conveniently brought together in once place at www.who.int/news-room/q-a-detail/coronavirus-disease-covid-19-masks

The key quote from the WHO is that for the general public 'masks should be worn when you’re in crowded settings, where you can’t be at least 1 metre from others, and in rooms with poor or unknown ventilation'. Seems to me that schools sit squarely within those circumstances.

I do completely acknowledge that it would be lunacy for all schools to open on 1 Feb, I'm not completely nuts.

But our government can take the opportunity during February in areas of low case rates to get better data around how mask use in schools COULD reduce transmission rates, without the effect of shops and pubs opening at the same time as they were in September and December. I'm baffled that no-one is pushing DfE to work with Sage to get high quality data NOW on what interventions, rotas, and additional measures reduce in school transmission the most. While most of us as still at home but keen to know the safest, fastest way to get kids back in more of the time.

For those screaming 'not ALL kids can wear masks', I do understand that. For the

And I will post this statistic again: only 8% of the adult working population has children of primary school age. Why does their ability to keep their job trump that of everyone else whose jobs are either furloughed, at risk or lost altogether?

Decisions around primary age children won’t be made solely for the working parents.

Especially since around half have a place now in school anyway. The push isn’t to help the other half cope.

Op I have zero issue with masks. If it helps, great.

@Billi77

A staggered approach would make sense with reception and year 1 going first after half term. These are the ages that seem less affected and the ones that are hardest to have at home when trying to work.

They are the group that may have the fewest adult symptoms-it doesn’t mean they don’t spread it home as much as anyone older would.

The problem with just having YR/Y1 or R/1/2 back is that you’ll have full infant schools and near-empty junior ones. Better to have a year group from each key stage if you’re trying to maintain any sort of distancing.

If you get full classes back, with no distancing no extra staff/spaces and no masks, those schools will probably just end up closing again.

No, cases will shoot right back up and we’ll be back where we started. Vaccination needs to be far more widespread first. This has to be got right this time. If we open up too soon again we’ll be in and out of lockdown for the rest of the year. That won’t help anyone.

"For those screaming 'not ALL kids can wear masks', I do understand that. For the

"It's obvious that some children cannot wear masks. Schools will know who many of these children are. No need to waste a doctors time with notes for these children. Notes would only be needed if there is disagreement."

What, like the school mentioned up-thread, where loads of children suddenly claimed they had asthma, when there had been no previous mention of it? Can you imagine the outcry (and ensuing threads on MN) if people felt they were being accused of lying? That school knew perfectly well there was no medical reason for all those children not wearing masks, but in practice there's little that can be done about it without causing WW3.

Can anyone explain why people are suddenly talking about ‘unlocking schools’ instead of opening them? I’ve seen it elsewhere too. They’re not locked. It’s a bit weird.

[quote Spikeyball]"For those screaming 'not ALL kids can wear masks', I do understand that. For the

Not only are they not locked but some of them still have significant numbers of kids in

@noblegiraffe

Can anyone explain why people are suddenly talking about ‘unlocking schools’ instead of opening them? I’ve seen it elsewhere too. They’re not locked. It’s a bit weird.

I’ve noticed that. It’s a very politicised term.

Open the schools at the start of feb? Really?
I think case numbers need to be very, very low before this is considered. We are in a very precarious position and any opening of schools needs to be treated extremely cautiously.