Scottish schools opening

[chocciechocface]

I was ready for schools opening, but this new research has given me pause for thought. I think this came out after Sturgeon's decision. What do you all think?

www.washingtonpost.com/health/2020/07/31/georgia-children-covid-outbreak/#click=t.co/Y9gSG9zENz

Quote from the article:

"A new report suggests that children of all ages are susceptible to coronavirus infection and may also spread it to others — a finding likely to intensify an already fraught discussion about the risks of sending children back to school this fall.

The analysis, released Friday by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, details an outbreak at a sleep-away camp in Georgia last month in which 260 children and staffers — more than three-quarters of the 344 tested — contracted the virus less than a week after spending time together in close quarters. The children had a median age of 12. The camp had required all 597 campers and staff members to provide documentation that they had tested negative for the virus before coming. Staff were required to wear masks, but children were not."

What use to man or beast is kids going to school once a week? They’d be better staying shut!
They'd have been better offering online learning and supplementing with limited school time if they think pupils physically being in school is important. Opening schools the way they have done is only going to lead to spikes and closures and that unpredictability is much more damaging for DCs' education and for parents' employment imo.

Peterhead and Aberdeen are only about 5 miles closer together than Edinburgh and Glasgow are

For once I agree with NS that outbreaks in schools (and elsewhere actually) are inevitable. We’ve just been hiding from the virus so of course once things start opening up there will be more cases. But then I don’t think ‘zero COVID’ is achievable and take the view that we need to live with it to some extent (although I’m not opposed to reasonable mitigation measures to protect vulnerable groups if they make people feel safer). The problem NS has now is that she’s spent the last couple of months making digs at Westminster and implying Scotland is doing so much better with our ‘elimination’ strategy so she now looks like a bit of a hypocrite.

Thing is there isn't an unlimited supply waiting to go in to keep schools open. We're heading to norovirus season too.

Outbreaks might not be inevitable if there was more spacing, mandatory mask wearing and testing - staff at least.
I have felt unsafe all week, and next week will be much more worse.

Outbreaks like that were most likely with us all last winter, only we didn't know. Now we do know and we can keep them under control.
I have not heard the daily PBB, but from what I read hear it sounds like NS too has been to Damascus; about time too.
If not even NZ can keep the coronavirus at bay...

the Peterhead and Glasow schools, and now that 300 odd people in a factory down south, makes me feel we are simply not really for a mass return to schools or offices. I'm very quickly changing my mind on how safe it all is.

And what do you suggest new did, @britINscotland, stay in the house till Kingdom come? There are no viable alternatives to reopening schools and going back to work.

@Arkadia

And what do you suggest new did, *@britINscotland*, stay in the house till Kingdom come? There are no viable alternatives to reopening schools and going back to work.

This

@Arkadia exactly. If the blended learning had gone ahead where were all the extra childminders and nursery spaces coming from? They are thin enough on the ground where I am as it is

There are viable alternatives. They could have extended hubs and allowed parents to opt in or out. They could have followed WHO advice. They could have learnt from countries that have already been through this process.
Lots of public sector and third sector employers have already extended their WFH arrangements so schools returning hasn't impacted on their return to work. Companies have already adjusted to their new normal. It's only schools that are being asked to ignore the research and the reality of living in a pandemic.

@BottomOfMyPencilCase that’s fine for those that can WFH a lot of people can’t. I work in community nursing so can’t work from home, how were these hubs going to be staffed and held now all schools are schools again and the teachers that were manning them are back to teaching? The volunteers who did it over the summer may not be able to volunteer again? It’s not as clear cut as all that

1 in nearly 20000 people are now estimated to have this virus. If it’s not “safe” now, at what level will it be?

Plus parents especially those of younger children often can’t work to their full potential when they’ve got to home school kids as well half the week. It’s one thing for employers to suck that up a few months as they did during lockdown but it’s not feasible ongoing for many.

Yes the idea wfh with kids is anything other than ineffective, a bad outcome for children and parents is hard to understand.

I can’t help thinking an elimination strategy was nonsense - hell even viruses with long standing and easily available vaccinations aren’t completely eradicated.

There are no viable alternatives to reopening schools and going back to work
But yet many, many jobs are not back at work, and I know half a dozen friends who won't be back till Christmas at the earliest (finance/banking).

Indeed, but thinking those who can't, @Goingdownto.
And even those who can... Who is going to look after their kids? Part time schooling is all very well, until you have to deal with it long term.
Besides, it makes no sense to wait till Christmas because there is no reason to think that come Christmas things will have improved ONE-SINGLE-BIT.
And then we cancel more and more exams until we abolish school altogether (not that we are not going in that direction anyway, but that's another matter).

The teachers would be in the school hubs. Parents who can't work from home with their DCs would get places in the hubs. Shielding and vulnerable teachers would provide online learning. Not everyone who works from home struggled to home educate because of flexible hours, age of DCs, etc. Research outwith the UK showed approx one third of parents would opt for online learning. Schools could run at two-thirds capacity allowing distancing etc.

@Goingdownto

There are no viable alternatives to reopening schools and going back to work But yet many, many jobs are not back at work, and I know half a dozen friends who won't be back till Christmas at the earliest (finance/banking).

Not back at work at all, or just not working in an office?

But most schools can’t run at 2/3 capacity allowing for distancing. Did you see the plans some authorities were coming up with? Kids in exam years in one day a week?

It’s no use. Cases are low and if we keep measures in place everywhere else we can as much as we can schools need to open and stay open and exams need to go ahead. There really isn’t any other feasible option to properly educate our children. People are too risk averse - 1 in 20000 people currently infected and too “scared” or don’t think it’s safe to go back to school - really. Am I apprehensive - yes as my kids could bring it home if they get it and I’m in a vulnerable group (not shielding) but we have to try and get things up and running

I’d have preferred part time for a period too but it’s not all about me it’s the overall balance of risk and my kids are happy to be back

People are too risk averse

I don't think this is fair. What we know about this virus is far outweighed by what we don't know. People who are vulnerable, or shielding, or who have family members in those categories, can't make judgements about risk when they don't know exactly what the risk is. To describe someone as risk averse - when they are concerned for lives - is just unfair.

My children are back at school and happy, but by sending them back we are playing Russian roulette with DH's health, and possibly his life.

But we don't actually know how big the risk is to him. He could be one of those people who gets it and is completely unaffected. If so, we'll throw our hands up and say 'all that worry for nothing'. Or he could die.

The one thing we do know is that the virus is extremely contagious and spreads fast. And that asymptomatic people can spread it too. It is scary.

I tend to agree that we have to get society moving again and that schools have to stay open whatever happens. Like many we have spent the last 5 months working from home while home schooling/looking after kids, but to actually be doing the amount of work we should be it means working well into the night every night (and still not managing some times) and it's just not sustainable. Employers only have so much patience.

There is actually a huge amount of data about which groups are most vulnerable, and it seem clear that the risks are very very small for healthy people under retirement age. Perhaps the solution for people who are worried about vulnerable members in their family is for them to have a home-school option if they choose, but the fear of the virus does seem disproportionate to the actual threat in most cases.

@SengaStrawberry, say you had gone back only part time, what would you have accomplished, except kicking the can down the road?
Say you keep school closed till September like in England, then you will be back to square one in a few days after that, and the arguments being put forward would be EXACTLY the same, as they have bee ALL summer.
The issue is the SG approach and way of communicating that exasperate the perception of risk and danger. we need not only a more balanced approach, but a more nuanced way of communicating.
Now that any hope of puling a Jacinda has been dashed we are only left with A LOT of anxiety.

I think the difference isn't between risk averse or not but as @chocciechocface said earlier, the difference between people who have had to risk assess professionally and people who haven't. The purpose of risk assessing is to look at the worst possible scenarios and take steps to mitigate against them. It seems local and national government risk assessments are not as extensive or robust as corporate or third sector ones.