Schools
-
- Posts: 5829
- Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 12:38 pm
- Been Liked: 2491 times
- Has Liked: 1477 times
- Location: On the high seas chasing Pirates
Schools
Should schools re open on the first of June or is it too soon?
Maybe they would be better waiting until after the summer term .
Maybe they would be better waiting until after the summer term .
-
- Posts: 19395
- Joined: Thu Jun 02, 2016 11:06 am
- Been Liked: 3157 times
- Has Liked: 481 times
Re: Schools
anyone any idea how many children fit into a classroom with a teacher while all are social distancing? All I know is that it sure isn't 30 (the standard class size and probably is below 10 in most schools
given most primary schools only have 7 classrooms (and a hall) I cannot see how you can fit 3 year groups, plus the children of key workerss into a school let alone find the teachers for them all
given most primary schools only have 7 classrooms (and a hall) I cannot see how you can fit 3 year groups, plus the children of key workerss into a school let alone find the teachers for them all
-
- Posts: 3281
- Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 9:07 am
- Been Liked: 843 times
- Has Liked: 1050 times
- Location: Newcastle upon Tyne
Re: Schools
Schools are generally much bigger than pubs with more potential sources of infection. It is too early to open both given the UK's failure to get the disease under control. Pupils, Teachers and Parents all require protection at this stage.
-
- Posts: 25697
- Joined: Sat Jun 24, 2017 9:43 pm
- Been Liked: 4644 times
- Has Liked: 9849 times
- Location: Glasgow
Re: Schools
IDK when the English holidays are,but i'm sure somebody mentioned the kids would be back about a month before the summer holidays kicked in,seems bizarre to allow them back for a few weeks when the virus is still prevalent,i can only assume this is happening as the government want people back at work ASAP.
I'm pretty sure the other devolved nations won't allow schools to reopen until August at the earliest,so quite why England should be any different beats me.
I'm pretty sure the other devolved nations won't allow schools to reopen until August at the earliest,so quite why England should be any different beats me.
Re: Schools
I don't think the kids should go back until the MP's go back
-
- Posts: 25697
- Joined: Sat Jun 24, 2017 9:43 pm
- Been Liked: 4644 times
- Has Liked: 9849 times
- Location: Glasgow
Re: Schools
Schools in England will be safe, Gove says
UK Cabinet Office Minister Michael Gove has said he is "confident that children and teachers will be safe" when returning to schools in England adding that the reopening would be “staged and careful”.
"Children will have to be distanced," he said on BBC One's Andrew Marr Show. "We can do that by making sure we have staggered lunch breaks and staggered arrivals."
Asked if he could guarantee that no teacher would get the virus, he replied: "There is always, always, always a risk of people catching the coronavirus - the key thing is we can make these workplaces safe."
He also said it was "extremely unlikely that any school will be a source of a [Covid-19] outbreak" and suggested that councils that were worried should "broaden the range of scientific advice" they were looking at.
"Children only have one chance on education - if you really care about children you will want them to be in school."
It'll all be fine Michael "we've had enough of experts" Gove says so.How you explain to a 5 year-old they can't run around you tell me,older students yes you can probably control their movements, but even with smaller class sizes there is a risk of spreading the virus.
UK Cabinet Office Minister Michael Gove has said he is "confident that children and teachers will be safe" when returning to schools in England adding that the reopening would be “staged and careful”.
"Children will have to be distanced," he said on BBC One's Andrew Marr Show. "We can do that by making sure we have staggered lunch breaks and staggered arrivals."
Asked if he could guarantee that no teacher would get the virus, he replied: "There is always, always, always a risk of people catching the coronavirus - the key thing is we can make these workplaces safe."
He also said it was "extremely unlikely that any school will be a source of a [Covid-19] outbreak" and suggested that councils that were worried should "broaden the range of scientific advice" they were looking at.
"Children only have one chance on education - if you really care about children you will want them to be in school."
It'll all be fine Michael "we've had enough of experts" Gove says so.How you explain to a 5 year-old they can't run around you tell me,older students yes you can probably control their movements, but even with smaller class sizes there is a risk of spreading the virus.
Re: Schools
They also said care homes were unlikely to be hit by the virus.tiger76 wrote: ↑Sun May 17, 2020 11:18 amSchools in England will be safe, Gove says
UK Cabinet Office Minister Michael Gove has said he is "confident that children and teachers will be safe" when returning to schools in England adding that the reopening would be “staged and careful”.
"Children will have to be distanced," he said on BBC One's Andrew Marr Show. "We can do that by making sure we have staggered lunch breaks and staggered arrivals."
Asked if he could guarantee that no teacher would get the virus, he replied: "There is always, always, always a risk of people catching the coronavirus - the key thing is we can make these workplaces safe."
He also said it was "extremely unlikely that any school will be a source of a [Covid-19] outbreak" and suggested that councils that were worried should "broaden the range of scientific advice" they were looking at.
"Children only have one chance on education - if you really care about children you will want them to be in school."
It'll all be fine Michael "we've had enough of experts" Gove says so.How you explain to a 5 year-old they can't run around you tell me,older students yes you can probably control their movements, but even with smaller class sizes there is a risk of spreading the virus.
-
- Posts: 25445
- Joined: Sat Mar 26, 2016 12:46 am
- Been Liked: 6930 times
- Has Liked: 11660 times
- Location: Leeds
Re: Schools
In fairness, that's a ridiculous question to put to somebody.
-
- Posts: 381
- Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2016 1:31 pm
- Been Liked: 196 times
- Has Liked: 158 times
Re: Schools
Posted on the Starmer thread in relation to Williamson's performance yesterday...
I've a reception aged child and live in the area of England with the highest estimated R. There are many reasons for it, but no way I'm sending him into school on 1st June as things stand.
This is glorified childcare and herd immunity by stealth. The educators have been sold down the swanee like the health and care workers.
I've a reception aged child and live in the area of England with the highest estimated R. There are many reasons for it, but no way I'm sending him into school on 1st June as things stand.
This is glorified childcare and herd immunity by stealth. The educators have been sold down the swanee like the health and care workers.
This user liked this post: evensteadiereddie
Re: Schools
Teachers in "I don't want to go back to work" shock.
Covid19 the next in a long line of reasons as to why they need/want more time off, better pay, better pensions etc.
Anyone would think they're doing 12 hour shifts in a factory on minimum wage just to eat.
Hand on heart don't think I'm aware of any other profession that complain so much about their pay or conditions, fakebook is flooded with them blowing their own trumpets calling each other heroes we should all spare a thought for.
If its really that poor working conditions, poor pay package, poor working hours, poor 12-13 weeks off a year, poor having every weekend and bank holiday off, then just pack it in.
Covid19 the next in a long line of reasons as to why they need/want more time off, better pay, better pensions etc.
Anyone would think they're doing 12 hour shifts in a factory on minimum wage just to eat.
Hand on heart don't think I'm aware of any other profession that complain so much about their pay or conditions, fakebook is flooded with them blowing their own trumpets calling each other heroes we should all spare a thought for.
If its really that poor working conditions, poor pay package, poor working hours, poor 12-13 weeks off a year, poor having every weekend and bank holiday off, then just pack it in.
This user liked this post: fatboy47
-
- Posts: 2743
- Joined: Fri Jan 29, 2016 2:31 pm
- Been Liked: 667 times
- Has Liked: 2053 times
Re: Schools
So if one group of workers have to endure appalling working conditions then no other groups should aspire to improve their own?MACCA wrote: ↑Sun May 17, 2020 11:42 amTeachers in "I don't want to go back to work" shock.
Covid19 the next in a long line of reasons as to why they need/want more time off, better pay, better pensions etc.
Anyone would think they're doing 12 hour shifts in a factory on minimum wage just to eat.
Hand on heart don't think I'm aware of any other profession that complain so much about their pay or conditions, fakebook is flooded with them blowing their own trumpets calling each other heroes we should all spare a thought for.
If its really that poor working conditions, poor pay package, poor working hours, poor 12-13 weeks off a year, poor having every weekend and bank holiday off, then just pack it in.
Re: Schools
I fully understand parents who are isolating, keeping their family safe, and not sending their kids in to mingle with other children.
What I have seen or heard so far that doesn't make sense is those still not sending their kids into school but then,
Ordering a takeaway once a week
Them or their partner going into work mixing with others
Parents going to play sports or do hobbies with their friends
Still going round to see family or friends for a quick visit
Letting their children go to see a parent that no longer lives with them, or allowing step child to come for a few days a week
Seems many are using certain issues as an excuse to me.
There will be genuinely people isolating and have been doing since day 1, but 80% or whatever that figure is that refuse to send them in can't hand on heart say they are fully isolating, or not putting their kids at risk of infection in other areas by doing choosing to live how they are.
Convenient excuse for far too many.
What I have seen or heard so far that doesn't make sense is those still not sending their kids into school but then,
Ordering a takeaway once a week
Them or their partner going into work mixing with others
Parents going to play sports or do hobbies with their friends
Still going round to see family or friends for a quick visit
Letting their children go to see a parent that no longer lives with them, or allowing step child to come for a few days a week
Seems many are using certain issues as an excuse to me.
There will be genuinely people isolating and have been doing since day 1, but 80% or whatever that figure is that refuse to send them in can't hand on heart say they are fully isolating, or not putting their kids at risk of infection in other areas by doing choosing to live how they are.
Convenient excuse for far too many.
-
- Posts: 25697
- Joined: Sat Jun 24, 2017 9:43 pm
- Been Liked: 4644 times
- Has Liked: 9849 times
- Location: Glasgow
Re: Schools
They did even when all the available evidence from Italy & Spain suggested otherwise.
Without going too much off-topic Gove's been defending this policy this morning.
Gove defends government record on care homes
More now of senior minister Michael Gove's interview to the BBC's Andrew Marr. Gove has defended the government's record on care homes, saying it "significantly" increased the number of testing for all people who are symptomatic in those facilities.
There have been concerns that too many patients were discharged from hospitals to care homes without being tested but Gove said those decisions were led by clinicians.
According to the Office for National Statistics there were 8,312 deaths in care homes in England and Wales where coronavirus was written on the death certificate up to 1 May.
On the government's test, track and trace strategy, Gove said 17,000 contact tracers had now been recruited with a "significant" number" of them having already been trained.
Whatever comes out of any future investigations,nobody can say we've treated our elderly well during this crisis.
Re: Schools
If you elaborate a touch I will know who or what you are talking about, discuss it with you, and then give my opinion.JohnDearyMe wrote: ↑Sun May 17, 2020 11:45 amSo if one group of workers have to endure appalling working conditions then no other groups should aspire to improve their own?
-
- Posts: 10913
- Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 8:56 pm
- Been Liked: 5560 times
- Has Liked: 208 times
Re: Schools
Surely all councils are following government advice and guidelines rather than seeking out their own scientific advice?
I was reasonably confident about sending my son back to nursery in June but hearing Gove say it will be safe has immediately made me think it won't be.
-
- Posts: 2108
- Joined: Tue Dec 29, 2015 8:31 am
- Been Liked: 1141 times
- Has Liked: 1619 times
- Location: Worsthorne
Re: Schools
My wife is a head teacher and I can guarantee that she doesn't have 12-13 weeks a year holiday, have every weekend and bank holiday off. In fact she's currently writing up risk assessments, as I type, so that the kids can possibly go back to her school.
She's worked every day since the outbreak, even over the weekends doing a job that she loves but when you get parents telling her that they can't wait for their kids to go back to school so they can "see their mates and learn something as they'redoing their heads in" it goes against the grain. Packs have been sent out each week for the parents to teach their own little darlings so I don't see what they would've learnt in school that they can't have at home.
This user liked this post: ClaretMov
Re: Schools
Agree with the last paragraph. On full pay sat at home, accumulating gold plated pensions and moaning.MACCA wrote: ↑Sun May 17, 2020 11:42 amTeachers in "I don't want to go back to work" shock.
Covid19 the next in a long line of reasons as to why they need/want more time off, better pay, better pensions etc.
Anyone would think they're doing 12 hour shifts in a factory on minimum wage just to eat.
Hand on heart don't think I'm aware of any other profession that complain so much about their pay or conditions, fakebook is flooded with them blowing their own trumpets calling each other heroes we should all spare a thought for.
If its really that poor working conditions, poor pay package, poor working hours, poor 12-13 weeks off a year, poor having every weekend and bank holiday off, then just pack it in.
Still too early for schools to go back though. Have you seen how narrow school corridors are ? My children won’t be used a guinea pigs. No Thanks.
-
- Posts: 10913
- Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 8:56 pm
- Been Liked: 5560 times
- Has Liked: 208 times
Re: Schools
There are definitely people about who will pick and choose which bits of the restrictions suit them.MACCA wrote: ↑Sun May 17, 2020 11:49 amI fully understand parents who are isolating, keeping their family safe, and not sending their kids in to mingle with other children.
What I have seen or heard so far that doesn't make sense is those still not sending their kids into school but then,
Ordering a takeaway once a week
Them or their partner going into work mixing with others
Parents going to play sports or do hobbies with their friends
Still going round to see family or friends for a quick visit
Letting their children go to see a parent that no longer lives with them, or allowing step child to come for a few days a week
Seems many are using certain issues as an excuse to me.
There will be genuinely people isolating and have been doing since day 1, but 80% or whatever that figure is that refuse to send them in can't hand on heart say they are fully isolating, or not putting their kids at risk of infection in other areas by doing choosing to live how they are.
Convenient excuse for far too many.
There will also be thousands of idiots who aren't following the rules who are out banging pots and pans every thursday night and congratulating themselves for it
These 3 users liked this post: FactualFrank tiger76 Bfcboyo
Re: Schools
This is because...Claret Till I Die wrote: ↑Sun May 17, 2020 11:53 amPacks have been sent out each week for the parents to teach their own little darlings so I don't see what they would've learnt in school that they can't have at home.
Parents are not trained teachers
Many learning styles have changed so much from when the child's parents were at school.
Many parents wont have all the the necessary equipment to home school
Children need routine to flourish.
People may have more than 1 child so may need to home school 2 or 3 children all doing different work at different levels and speed.
If parents could home school their children to the same standard, they'd be no need for schools at all.
As for parents asking when schools open as their kids are doing their heads in, it says a lot a bout the parent...
-
- Posts: 381
- Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2016 1:31 pm
- Been Liked: 196 times
- Has Liked: 158 times
Re: Schools
MACCA, I can only imagine how grim life must be having such a dim and stereotypical view of large swathes of the population.
It's not just the potential for kids to become infected but also the extent to which they pass it on to others including their teachers. I read a tweet in response to a DofE tweet yesterday from a reception teacher who'd caught covid-19 and strongly suspected it was from one of the children in her class. She'd passed it on to get husband who'd become very I'll.
Putting covid-19 infection aside, school will be utterly abnormal oif they go back on 1st June, and to expect 4 year olds to process and adapt to that without it having lasting effects is naive. It will be very upsetting for large numbers of them.
It's not just the potential for kids to become infected but also the extent to which they pass it on to others including their teachers. I read a tweet in response to a DofE tweet yesterday from a reception teacher who'd caught covid-19 and strongly suspected it was from one of the children in her class. She'd passed it on to get husband who'd become very I'll.
Putting covid-19 infection aside, school will be utterly abnormal oif they go back on 1st June, and to expect 4 year olds to process and adapt to that without it having lasting effects is naive. It will be very upsetting for large numbers of them.
-
- Posts: 18088
- Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 10:35 am
- Been Liked: 3863 times
- Has Liked: 2073 times
Re: Schools
Schools will have to open.
There's too many single parents with 3 kids etc that simply won't be coping.
Maybe split the day in two so half the class does mornings and half do afternoons until after the summer break.
Remember the Government wouldn't have shut schools until the teachers started dropping like flies with symptoms.
There's too many single parents with 3 kids etc that simply won't be coping.
Maybe split the day in two so half the class does mornings and half do afternoons until after the summer break.
Remember the Government wouldn't have shut schools until the teachers started dropping like flies with symptoms.
Last edited by Quickenthetempo on Sun May 17, 2020 12:12 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Re: Schools
But many schools are operating at around 25% capacity now, who's to say in 3 weeks the R rate is really low and the next step of upping the schools operating figure to 50% isn't the best thing for children, their parents and the country.
I fully back parents who are fully isolating as they are protecting their children best the see fit, but there are many who wont be sending them in for various reasons yet trust 3 or 4 takeaway staff to prepare their food in a confined space not knowing what measure the staff or their families at home are doing to stop the spread of the virus.
Id trust teachers to put my child's health and well being first long before half a dozen people I don't know who prepare, handle and deliver my takeaway once or twice a week...
Re: Schools
Im sure there's been teachers who have passed the infection on to a child too, who has in turn infected their parents who should be key workers who then cannot work as they have to isolate or they have become ill.BurningBeard wrote: ↑Sun May 17, 2020 12:09 pmMACCA, I can only imagine how grim life must be having such a dim and stereotypical view of large swathes of the population.
It's not just the potential for kids to become infected but also the extent to which they pass it on to others including their teachers. I read a tweet in response to a DofE tweet yesterday from a reception teacher who'd caught covid-19 and strongly suspected it was from one of the children in her class. She'd passed it on to get husband who'd become very I'll.
Putting covid-19 infection aside, school will be utterly abnormal oif they go back on 1st June, and to expect 4 year olds to process and adapt to that without it having lasting effects is naive. It will be very upsetting for large numbers of them.
Seen many teachers or their partners mixing with family still, ordering takeout, playing sports, sending or receiving step kids to their 2 different homes as "well I'm working any way and not isolating so there's no difference" or " im in contact with 30 people a day, what's another 10 going to matter" type stance.
Re: Schools
fully agree.TheFamilyCat wrote: ↑Sun May 17, 2020 12:00 pmThere are definitely people about who will pick and choose which bits of the restrictions suit them.
There will also be thousands of idiots who aren't following the rules who are out banging pots and pans every thursday night and congratulating themselves for it
It's laughable the amount of people who wont send their kids to school, or teachers not wanting to return to school to keep themselves or their family safe that are exposing themselves and family just as much by things they are doing or the restrictions the weren't following.
Very quick to cry wolf when if they look at their actions for the past 10 weeks, they've been indirectly exposing their kids all along.
-
- Posts: 1868
- Joined: Sat Jan 23, 2016 1:33 pm
- Been Liked: 383 times
- Has Liked: 236 times
- Location: Skipton
Re: Schools
The children being expected to return to school are as young as 4. Take a moment to imagine ten 4-year-olds being expected to 'work' on their own within a classroom setting and to play on their own. Be aware that teachers won't go near the children, so they won't be working with them or talking to them or hearing them read one-to-one, and they won't be allowed to comfort them when they cry.
Why anyone continues to state that this type of return to school is in the child's best interest in order to avoid long term damage to their education is staggeringly ridiculous. At best, children will come away with memories of incessant warnings, the smell of disinfectant and a fear of proximity. Home might be even more welcoming at the end of a school day than it has ever been.
Anyone who has ever had a 4-year-old child know that it is impossible to stop them going to other children, in fact it's what teachers encourage for socialisation, work ethic, happiness, good mental health and so on. So....they will go to their friends and the virus may well spread from those children to their parents etc. Then the person who was once a 4-year-old will know for the rest of their lives that they spread the virus, possibly leading to deaths.
Being alive is more important than going to school.
DO NOT send very young children to school yet.
Why anyone continues to state that this type of return to school is in the child's best interest in order to avoid long term damage to their education is staggeringly ridiculous. At best, children will come away with memories of incessant warnings, the smell of disinfectant and a fear of proximity. Home might be even more welcoming at the end of a school day than it has ever been.
Anyone who has ever had a 4-year-old child know that it is impossible to stop them going to other children, in fact it's what teachers encourage for socialisation, work ethic, happiness, good mental health and so on. So....they will go to their friends and the virus may well spread from those children to their parents etc. Then the person who was once a 4-year-old will know for the rest of their lives that they spread the virus, possibly leading to deaths.
Being alive is more important than going to school.
DO NOT send very young children to school yet.
This user liked this post: Blackrod
-
- Posts: 10913
- Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 8:56 pm
- Been Liked: 5560 times
- Has Liked: 208 times
Re: Schools
I didn't really read beyond "play on their own" and "teachers won't go near them".Im_not_Robbie_Blake wrote: ↑Sun May 17, 2020 12:20 pmThe children being expected to return to school are as young as 4. Take a moment to imagine ten 4-year-olds being expected to 'work' on their own within a classroom setting and to play on their own. Be aware that teachers won't go near the children, so they won't be working with them or talking to them or hearing them read one-to-one, and they won't be allowed to comfort them when they cry.
Why anyone continues to state that this type of return to school is in the child's best interest in order to avoid long term damage to their education is staggeringly ridiculous. At best, children will come away with memories of incessant warnings, the smell of disinfectant and a fear of proximity. Home might be even more welcoming at the end of a school day than it has ever been.
Anyone who has ever had a 4-year-old child know that it is impossible to stop them going to other children, in fact it's what teachers encourage for socialisation, work ethic, happiness, good mental health and so on. So....they will go to their friends and the virus may well spread from those children to their parents etc. Then the person who was once a 4-year-old will know for the rest of their lives that they spread the virus, possibly leading to deaths.
Being alive is more important than going to school.
DO NOT send very young children to school yet.
We have received our son's nursery (nursery not school, granted). It is clear about how they plan to manage groups; basically splitting each room into smaller areas with children in groups of 6 with one staff member. Of course, this will be strange to the children when they are used to having a pretty much free run of the place but to suggest they won't play together or staff won't go near the kids is ridiculous.
-
- Posts: 381
- Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2016 1:31 pm
- Been Liked: 196 times
- Has Liked: 158 times
Re: Schools
This might be true to a small extent but it should be about the minimisation of risk. My wife goes to the supermarket once a week which is itself a risk - the food has been handled by god knows who, but we need to eat. Is this ok or not ok?
It would reduce the risk by sending back older kids to schools as they will be more easily able to adhere to new safely measures put in place and would be able to understand and cope better emotionally.
Edit - in response to MACCA.
It would reduce the risk by sending back older kids to schools as they will be more easily able to adhere to new safely measures put in place and would be able to understand and cope better emotionally.
Edit - in response to MACCA.
-
- Posts: 10913
- Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 8:56 pm
- Been Liked: 5560 times
- Has Liked: 208 times
Re: Schools
On the flip side, younger children are being impacted more on their loss of routine (without understanding why) and their social development. So you could argue that it is younger children who should be prioritised, although I appreciate that getting them to follow new protocols is much more of a challenge.BurningBeard wrote: ↑Sun May 17, 2020 12:28 pmThis might be true to a small extent but it should be about the minimisation of risk. My wife goes to the supermarket once a week which is itself a risk - the food has been handled by god knows who, but we need to eat. Is this ok or not ok?
It would reduce the risk by sending back older kids to schools as they will be more easily able to adhere to new safely measures put in place and would be able to understand and cope better emotionally.
-
- Posts: 1868
- Joined: Sat Jan 23, 2016 1:33 pm
- Been Liked: 383 times
- Has Liked: 236 times
- Location: Skipton
Re: Schools
To TheFamilyCat - are you really happy about your child being in a group of 6 plus a teacher? Isn't that a violation of social distancing?
Re: Schools
What about children 0-4 that are still going to childcare on a daily basis?Im_not_Robbie_Blake wrote: ↑Sun May 17, 2020 12:20 pmThe children being expected to return to school are as young as 4. Take a moment to imagine ten 4-year-olds being expected to 'work' on their own within a classroom setting and to play on their own. Be aware that teachers won't go near the children, so they won't be working with them or talking to them or hearing them read one-to-one, and they won't be allowed to comfort them when they cry.
DO NOT send very young children to school yet.
Are they suffering?
I know of a setting that has reopened after 7 weeks closed, and the children after isolating at home for 7 weeks, have had "a new lease of life" after getting back to a routine they were once used too, after seeing their friends after such a long time, and being in a different environment for the first time in a while.
Why can a setting with say a dozen 0-4 year olds not need to social distance, can hug, play, and have normality, yet a dozen 4-6 year olds in a school classroom cant?
Or why are the restrictions in place safe or good enough for the key worker children who are keeping the country going, but aren't safe for single mum Sharon's 4 kids who's been sat on her arse for 2 decades?
If it is good enough for 1 child it should be good enough for them all.
If it isn't safe enough, good enough or acceptable for 1 child, then it shouldn't be open at all!
Re: Schools
See my above post..BurningBeard wrote: ↑Sun May 17, 2020 12:28 pmThis might be true to a small extent but it should be about the minimisation of risk. My wife goes to the supermarket once a week which is itself a risk - the food has been handled by god knows who, but we need to eat. Is this ok or not ok?
It would reduce the risk by sending back older kids to schools as they will be more easily able to adhere to new safely measures put in place and would be able to understand and cope better emotionally.
Edit - in response to MACCA.
-
- Posts: 381
- Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2016 1:31 pm
- Been Liked: 196 times
- Has Liked: 158 times
Re: Schools
Agree to an extent and it has been a challenge to keep a 4 year old occupied and educated whilst my wife and I hold down full time jobs from home, so in that respect it would be very easy for me to just send him back. However, it's about the assessment of risk on personal level and my view is that it's too high at present.TheFamilyCat wrote: ↑Sun May 17, 2020 12:31 pmOn the flip side, younger children are being impacted more on their loss of routine (without understanding why) and their social development. So you could argue that it is younger children who should be prioritised, although I appreciate that getting them to follow new protocols is much more of a challenge.
If people think differently then all power to them and I hope everyone stays safe.
-
- Posts: 381
- Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2016 1:31 pm
- Been Liked: 196 times
- Has Liked: 158 times
Re: Schools
Do you think having all reception and year 1 kids go back as well as having the existing key worker primary kids at school increases, decreases or maintains the same level of risk? Do you think it will increase or decrease R, or keep it the same?
-
- Posts: 413
- Joined: Mon Jan 18, 2016 6:26 pm
- Been Liked: 153 times
- Has Liked: 94 times
Re: Schools
Pick any arbitrary date, June 1st, September 1st, January 2021, what will be different then? Do we keep kicking the can further down the road? Children and teachers will certainly not have had a vaccine to protect them from corona virus by then. A managed return to school is the only option.
Re: Schools
If the measure currently in place are the same - the sameBurningBeard wrote: ↑Sun May 17, 2020 12:48 pmDo you think having all reception and year 1 kids go back as well as having the existing key worker primary kids at school increases, decreases or maintains the same level of risk? Do you think it will increase or decrease R, or keep it the same?
In 3 weeks a expect the R rate to have decreased so the new intake of children will be at less risks than those key work children have been for the last 8 weeks..
I think the R rate will continue to steadily decrease, so in 3 weeks we are in a better position to increase the numbers of people mixing without the R rate increasing dramatically.
If you are waiting or wanting the R rate to be 0 before you leave the house, you return to work or your child to return to school you'll be waiting forever.
How many children primary school age have died from the virus in the last 12 weeks and when it was at its peak?
How many children in the same period of time last year died from chicken pox or measles?
So children should never return to school again due to the chance they may contract chicken pox or measles...
As said a convenient excuse for many.
-
- Posts: 381
- Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2016 1:31 pm
- Been Liked: 196 times
- Has Liked: 158 times
Re: Schools
Don't disagree, just don't think it's being managed in the best way at present. Wrong age groups and R not low enough yet.
These 2 users liked this post: evensteadiereddie tiger76
-
- Posts: 4388
- Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 8:09 pm
- Been Liked: 1826 times
- Has Liked: 930 times
Re: Schools
More data, more studies, more trials, more drugs, more preparation, more certainty.BigRedrose wrote: ↑Sun May 17, 2020 12:57 pmPick any arbitrary date, June 1st, September 1st, January 2021, what will be different then?
Lower cases, lower R, lower risk.
These 4 users liked this post: BurningBeard evensteadiereddie FactualFrank tiger76
-
- Posts: 9600
- Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 9:45 pm
- Been Liked: 3148 times
- Has Liked: 10250 times
- Location: Staffordshire
Re: Schools
This is nothing to do with safety nor education.
The government need a child-minding service, however vulnerable teaching staff might be, so people can go back to work.
Like unprotected health workers and social-care workers before them, teachers of primary kids are expected to put themselves at risk, baby minding a legion of potential "super-carriers" ?
"**** off" is quite a reasonable response in these circumstances. I'd love to see some of our resident bar-room bores stick their necks out.
The government need a child-minding service, however vulnerable teaching staff might be, so people can go back to work.
Like unprotected health workers and social-care workers before them, teachers of primary kids are expected to put themselves at risk, baby minding a legion of potential "super-carriers" ?
"**** off" is quite a reasonable response in these circumstances. I'd love to see some of our resident bar-room bores stick their necks out.
These 2 users liked this post: BurningBeard tiger76
Re: Schools
But who knows what the R rate or death figures will be in 3 weeks time?BurningBeard wrote: ↑Sun May 17, 2020 1:00 pmDon't disagree, just don't think it's being managed in the best way at present. Wrong age groups and R not low enough yet.
Why can't we "prepare to return" and see where we are in 2 weeks?
Im 100% sure that if there is a high risk to childrens health when its time to go back, then it will be instantly review and be a none starter.
They are "preparing for a slow and staggered return" when its safe to do so.
What would parents and teachers prefer, Boris to announce at 19:00 on a sunday night, by the way back to school starts again at 8.45 tomorrow?
-
- Posts: 5876
- Joined: Wed Jan 27, 2016 6:39 pm
- Been Liked: 1695 times
- Has Liked: 2534 times
- Location: Rawtenstall
Re: Schools
2% over the lockdown but don't let an extra few spoil your argument.MACCA wrote: ↑Sun May 17, 2020 12:11 pmBut many schools are operating at around 25% capacity now, who's to say in 3 weeks the R rate is really low and the next step of upping the schools operating figure to 50% isn't the best thing for children, their parents and the country.
I fully back parents who are fully isolating as they are protecting their children best the see fit, but there are many who wont be sending them in for various reasons yet trust 3 or 4 takeaway staff to prepare their food in a confined space not knowing what measure the staff or their families at home are doing to stop the spread of the virus.
Id trust teachers to put my child's health and well being first long before half a dozen people I don't know who prepare, handle and deliver my takeaway once or twice a week...
-
- Posts: 1868
- Joined: Sat Jan 23, 2016 1:33 pm
- Been Liked: 383 times
- Has Liked: 236 times
- Location: Skipton
Re: Schools
I was making the point that the 4-year-olds can spread the virus back to their homes, not necessarily that they will have symptoms themselves. I know there is a doubt about whether children can be 'carriers', but if we don't know we shouldn't risk it.
-
- Posts: 797
- Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2016 6:29 pm
- Been Liked: 197 times
- Has Liked: 48 times
Re: Schools
I remember the coal strikes - we were kept from school, apart from half a day a week - didn’t scar any of us.
-
- Posts: 413
- Joined: Mon Jan 18, 2016 6:26 pm
- Been Liked: 153 times
- Has Liked: 94 times
Re: Schools
More data, more studies, we've got data coming out of our ears, most of it conflicting. As I said come September/January the same arguments will apply.CombatClaret wrote: ↑Sun May 17, 2020 1:01 pmMore data, more studies, more trials, more drugs, more preparation, more certainty.
Lower cases, lower R, lower risk.
-
- Posts: 9600
- Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 9:45 pm
- Been Liked: 3148 times
- Has Liked: 10250 times
- Location: Staffordshire
Re: Schools
"Im 100% sure that if there is a high risk to childrens health when its time to go back, then it will be instantly review and be a none starter."
Any risk, surely ?
And if there's any risk to teachers and support staff also, high or otherwise, we should learn from the earlier mistakes the government made, ones that killed hundreds needlessly, review the situation and make it a non-starter.
Any risk, surely ?
And if there's any risk to teachers and support staff also, high or otherwise, we should learn from the earlier mistakes the government made, ones that killed hundreds needlessly, review the situation and make it a non-starter.
Re: Schools
No, not any risk. Risks have to be taken in life. If the risk becomes too great then clearly it shouldn't happen. But if it's low risk and can mitigated then we need to get society moving again, including children going to school on a phased and cautious basis.evensteadiereddie wrote: ↑Sun May 17, 2020 1:12 pm"Im 100% sure that if there is a high risk to childrens health when its time to go back, then it will be instantly review and be a none starter."
Any risk, surely ?
And if there's any risk to teachers and support staff also, high or otherwise, we should learn from the earlier mistakes the government made, ones that killed hundreds needlessly, review the situation and make it a non-starter.
-
- Posts: 797
- Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2016 6:29 pm
- Been Liked: 197 times
- Has Liked: 48 times
Re: Schools
Gove referred to Denmark - a country that locked its border early! I’ll keep on banging my drum about this - we continued to allow any Tom, Dick or Murgatroyd to enter this country (not to mention the thousands of Chinese university students in January) and now we’re paying for it!
-
- Posts: 381
- Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2016 1:31 pm
- Been Liked: 196 times
- Has Liked: 158 times
Re: Schools
Given the schyteshow that large parts of the government's handling of this whole thing has been, do you think I'm more likely to trust Gavin Williamson, or the BMA and eductors?
These 5 users liked this post: jackmiggins Steve-Harpers-perm evensteadiereddie JohnDearyMe tiger76
-
- Posts: 5792
- Joined: Sun Jan 24, 2016 10:52 am
- Been Liked: 1884 times
- Has Liked: 841 times
Re: Schools
Odd why people are being criticised for wanting to keep themselves and others safe. Especially as it’s the same scientists who told the government mass gatherings at sporting events were fine to go ahead.
These 2 users liked this post: evensteadiereddie BurningBeard
-
- Posts: 797
- Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2016 6:29 pm
- Been Liked: 197 times
- Has Liked: 48 times
Re: Schools
We only have a limited number of government approved scientists that are presently allowed to give their views.
-
- Posts: 3120
- Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 8:24 am
- Been Liked: 946 times
- Has Liked: 411 times
Re: Schools
I would much prefer that they look to flexibly approach education.
1/6 is too soon for us - we can both work from home and we are unlikely to be needed to work differently for the rest of the year from what we are being told.
The bit for me is that why we couldn't get a better solution for teaching primary school kids in this period. How difficult would it have been to set up 2-3 zoom type calls a day with the class and look to do some kind of structured teaching this way? I know reception and yr1 and possibly yr2 would be more difficult but I believe more could have been done for years 3-4-5-6 when it came to trying to maintain some learning.
The classrooms are not massive in SQ/M at the school and I have roughly worked out it would take about 8 kids and a teacher to maintain proper social distancing.
The schools are designed with corridors which won't allow social distancing
The kids are likely to get too close.
All of this isn't necessarily high risk in itself BUT when you add in the transmission to/from us which would then mean we would not feel able to have contact with more vulnerable members our our families and looking at the parks this weekend where they have been packed - I just think we are at a point where it could explode again.
They have reduced the restrictions because there is NHS capacity. I don't want me or my family to take up any of that capacity where they are making a choice between me, my wife and my children and someone from your family on who gets the help.
1/6 is too soon for us - we can both work from home and we are unlikely to be needed to work differently for the rest of the year from what we are being told.
The bit for me is that why we couldn't get a better solution for teaching primary school kids in this period. How difficult would it have been to set up 2-3 zoom type calls a day with the class and look to do some kind of structured teaching this way? I know reception and yr1 and possibly yr2 would be more difficult but I believe more could have been done for years 3-4-5-6 when it came to trying to maintain some learning.
The classrooms are not massive in SQ/M at the school and I have roughly worked out it would take about 8 kids and a teacher to maintain proper social distancing.
The schools are designed with corridors which won't allow social distancing
The kids are likely to get too close.
All of this isn't necessarily high risk in itself BUT when you add in the transmission to/from us which would then mean we would not feel able to have contact with more vulnerable members our our families and looking at the parks this weekend where they have been packed - I just think we are at a point where it could explode again.
They have reduced the restrictions because there is NHS capacity. I don't want me or my family to take up any of that capacity where they are making a choice between me, my wife and my children and someone from your family on who gets the help.
This user liked this post: evensteadiereddie