COVID-19: School Closures

[Harvey B]

You don't have kids, do you?

Im 16 and left High School last year and Im just finishing my first year of college.

 

[farleigh]

It might be your opinion, but it seems that Gavin Williamson doesn't agree with you.

It might be your opinion but does he (or has he ever) work/ed in a school?

 

[JamesT]

I very much doubt that the younger children in primary schools will be among the first to go back. Even if they did, I think many parents would keep them at home.

Elsewhere I’d seen the suggestion that actually the younger children would be the most likely to go back. As the virus effect seems to correlate with age they would be the least affected and potentially less likely to pass it on, even if they can’t manage social distancing. The other point was that it would have a bigger effect on allowing parents to go back to work as they wouldn’t need to be caring for their children. Whereas the parents of older children could get away with less monitoring whilst they work.

 

[The Ham]

Elsewhere I’d seen the suggestion that actually the younger children would be the most likely to go back. As the virus effect seems to correlate with age they would be the least affected and potentially less likely to pass it on, even if they can’t manage social distancing. The other point was that it would have a bigger effect on allowing parents to go back to work as they wouldn’t need to be caring for their children. Whereas the parents of older children could get away with less monitoring whilst they work.

If you want patents back at work then you also need nurseries, childminders and other settings to reopen. The wider that net is then the bigger the risk of adults passing it on to each other.

Even something like the distribution from one adult to (say) a lunch box, and then onto another adult.

Given that there appears that there's a few days of being infectious before symptoms appear, then unless people are being tested regularly then it could get spread around quite a few people before it's identified.

Actually for some it could be more useful to have the child at home rather than having to stop work to drop them off and pick them up. which can easily take an hour or of the day to do, but may (if 1/2 days happen) gain you back 3 hours. That's before you count the time and effort associated with getting the child ready before school.

 

[Harvey B]

Monday 1st June in England is my prediction for primary schools and, quite possibly, secondary school pupils due to sit GCSEs next year, maybe another year too - I can't see the others going back. I suspect school uniform will not be de rigeur in any but the schools with pretentious attitudes.

my thoughts exactly

 

[trebor79]

I totally agree with everything that you say.
However, these are exceptional circumstances and I have the feeling that the younger children may be the most difficult group to be returned to school because they will not understand social distancing.
Social distancing is going to be almost impossible with many children in Foundation and Key Stage 1 classes.

Having not seen their teachers and friends for many weeks it will be very difficult to stop these children running into school hugging their teachers and friends. It would be very difficult, even with smaller numbers to stop young children coming into close contact with others. Young children gravitate towards each other, when they are working or playing, or when having their lunch.
What about the children with special needs such as those with various types of autism, who will grab hold and hug other children and will want to cling on to the teacher and other adults working in schools. Young children fall down and hurt themselves and expect a cuddle from an adult, they get upset and cry, want to go home, and have to be comforted by an adult often involving hand holding, hugging or even sitting on an adults knee.

It will be an almost impossible and extremely stressful task for teachers of young children to enforce and maintain social distancing at all times. Will we have parents who will blame the teacher and even threaten legal action if their child is hugged by another child?

We just need to accept social distancing won't happen at school and with young people on the way to and from school. As the virus isn't a killer for young people that's no problem.

At some stage we are going to have to wake up and smell the coffee and realise the virus is going to affect many many more people and do our best to carry on as normal. Having the economy shut down and people not being properly educated (and on all likelihood a similar eventual death from CV19) is going to lead us to a far worse place in the long term.

 

[The Ham]

We just need to accept social distancing won't happen at school and with young people on the way to and from school. As the virus isn't a killer for young people that's no problem.

At some stage we are going to have to wake up and smell the coffee and realise the virus is going to affect many many more people and do our best to carry on as normal. Having the economy shut down and people not being properly educated (and on all likelihood a similar eventual death from CV19) is going to lead us to a far worse place in the long term.

Whilst there's truth in much of what you say there's still a balance to be had. For instance there have still been deaths amongst children who have underlying health issues. Often where they're able to participate in school normally otherwise. That's going to lead to parents of those children wanting to keep all their children home.

Likewise anyone with their own health issues or who care for those with health issues will be inclined to do likewise.

That's before you look at the staff (which may be beyond just the teachers), who may have similar concerns and may stay away from work.

I suspect that there's going to be a desire to follow the lead of private schools where they've been doing full school days by using technology to deliver it.

Now whilst there's a digital divide within the wider population, government/schools could issue tablets which are education locked with built in 4g. In doing so you could lock what is installed on each device and limit functions (so for instance the camera is disabled unless within certain apps).

Now whilst there would be a cost with doing so, schools often have a need for tablets within a school setting. As such this would likely result in schools in the most deprived areas getting a boost in their technology equipment.

By having virtual classrooms, it would enable more of those who work from home to get more done, in that their school aged children wouldn't need their support to get in with their work.

It would also enable those staff with underlaying health issues to be useful in educating the children of the nation, as well as providing an option to those who need to protect themselves, their children or those they care for to enable their children to be taught in a formal setting.

You could have 1:15 teaching and 1:45 self working teacher/student ratios. In doing so the children are supported whilst giving teachers the time to teach.

 

[Domh245]

It might be your opinion but does he (or has he ever) work/ed in a school?

Whether he has or not is irrelevant - as the education secretary what he says, goes! Being in his position though, he'll be surrounded by people who have worked, and still work in schools

 

[Huntergreed]

I’m training as a student music teacher at the moment in Scotland. Certainly for my subject, social distancing becomes nigh on impossible as it’s heavily practical and involves a teacher demonstrating how to complete various tasks in close range otherwise it just doesn’t work. The layout of our music classrooms is already much more spread out than other classrooms due to all the equipment, and realistically if we were to social distance further in a class like this it would only allow 5 - 10 at an absolute push in the class at any one time. I’m aware that this isn’t the deciding factor but I just thought I’d share my view on this.

Overall I can see it potentially being limited to children who perhaps sit exams being allowed to return full time with social distancing, with all other pupils in part time (every other day/week) to make social distancing easier. In Scotland there’s already been cries out from the teaching unions to cancel next year’s (2021) exam diet because it simply won’t be possible to squash the content of the course combined with what’s been missed out into an even shorter period, regardless of whether we return full time or part time.

On another angle, the young ones I feel most sorry for at the moment are the ones who are waiting on results to get into uni in September, they’re totally unsure of what to expect and, even if they make the grade, nobody knows if they’ll be going to uni in September or at all this year.

 

[Domh245]

Now this is interesting:

No reported case of a child passing coronavirus to an adult exists, evidence review shows

There has not been a single reported instance of a child under 10 transmitting the virus, even in contact tracing carried out by WHO

www.telegraph.co.uk

No child has been found to have passed coronavirus to an adult, a review of evidence in partnership with the Royal College of Paediatricians has found.

Major studies into the impact of Covid-19 on young children show it is likely that they "do not play a significant role" in spreading the virus and are significantly less likely to become infected than adults.

While experts have said more evidence is needed, they note that there has not been a single case of a child under 10 transmitting the virus even in contact tracing carried out by the World Health Organisation (WHO).

The development comes after public health officials in Switzerland announced that under-10s can hug their grandparents again because they pose no risk to them.

A review in partnership with the Royal College of Paediatricians and Child Health (RCPCH), found that the evidence "consistently demonstrates reduced infection and infectivity of children in the transmission chain".

Led by Dr Alasdair Munro, a clinical research fellow in paediatric infectious diseases, the study's research concluded: "Covid-19 appears to affect children less often, and with less severity, including frequent asymptomatic or sub-clinical infection. There is evidence of critical illness, but it is rare. The role of children in transmission is unclear, but it seems likely they do not play a significant role."

The review, by the Don't Forget the Bubbles paediatric research project, added: "Notably, the China/WHO joint commission could not recall episodes during contact tracing where transmission occurred from a child to an adult."

Among the evidence is a study of a nine-year-old British boy who contracted coronavirus in a French Alps but did not pass it on despite having contact with more than 170 people at three schools.

The boy, among the cases linked to Steve Walsh, the first Briton to test positive, also had influenza and a common cold which he passed to both of his siblings – but neither picked up Covid-19.

Kostas Danis, an epidemiologist at Public Health France who carried out that study, said the fact that children develop a milder form may explain why they do not transmit the virus.

He said that while it was possible children could infect others, there has not been a case to date and there is "no evidence that closing schools is an effective measure".

Further evidence from China showed that, when families had contracted the virus, children were "unlikely to be the index case".

Professor Russell Viner, the president of the RCPCH, said: "From around the world, we are not seeing evidence that children are involved in spreading or transmitting the virus, but we do not have enough evidence."

Prof Viner added that it was too soon to say children could hug their grandparents, particularly as the over-70s are the most vulnerable.

 

[PeterC]

I would anticipate a phased reopening starting in June. The children who are present spread across more, smaller, classes. Possibly a shorter day without communual play or meal times to keep contact within small groups. A full return possible in September.

 

[Bletchleyite]

I would anticipate a phased reopening starting in June. The children who are present spread across more, smaller, classes. Possibly a shorter day without communual play or meal times to keep contact within small groups. A full return possible in September.

I think one benefit of opening in June if only for 6 weeks is that we can use that as an experiment to see what works prior to having 6 weeks to plan and decide before doing a more "permanent" job in September.

 

[Meerkat]

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-52470838

Swiss authorities say it is now safe for children under the age of 10 to hug their grandparents, in a revision to official advice on coronavirus.

The health ministry's infectious diseases chief Daniel Koch said scientists had concluded that young children did not transmit the virus.

If the Swiss are right then there isn’t much reason not to send the younger kids to school
I think any possible return is important, however short.
Its good for the kids to see their friends and teachers and it’s good for the parents to get a break from the kids. It also makes sure the kids get fed and get seen - which could be very important for safeguarding and looking for problems.

 

[yorkie]

Now this is interesting:

No reported case of a child passing coronavirus to an adult exists, evidence review shows

There has not been a single reported instance of a child under 10 transmitting the virus, even in contact tracing carried out by WHO

www.telegraph.co.uk

Indeed, I have seen similar reports. For secondary schools I'd like to see the priority to get Year 7 and 8 in school ASAP, partly because of this reason, and also because the younger students are more likely to require supervision, so their parents can get back to work.

I don't think many people realise just how much some students are struggling with this lockdown. I know because I have spoken to some students and some parents. On the other hand some are coping surprisingly well, but that won't last forever.

I will reserve judgement on the actions taken for now, but I do worry that we may not make decisions that are the right decisions for young people. I can never forgive the actions of Spain for example. Anyway time will tell..

 

[HH]

It might be your opinion but does he (or has he ever) work/ed in a school?

Er, it's not my opinion and does it matter if he's ever worked in a school - he's the one in charge of all the schools.

I guess that you didn't realise that...

 

[HH]

Now this is interesting:

It is. Of course they say that they need more evidence - don't they always?

It would be great if it is the case, because that's almost all primary school children covered.

Now they just have to sort out how the children get dropped off at school...

P.S. I'm not sure about hugging the (over 70) grandparents, unless they can also show that the virus can't be transmitted by touch.

 

[farleigh]

Er, it's not my opinion and does it matter if he's ever worked in a school - he's the one in charge of all the schools.

I guess that you didn't realise that...

So you disagree with him?

 

[Ianno87]

Elsewhere I’d seen the suggestion that actually the younger children would be the most likely to go back. As the virus effect seems to correlate with age they would be the least affected and potentially less likely to pass it on, even if they can’t manage social distancing. The other point was that it would have a bigger effect on allowing parents to go back to work as they wouldn’t need to be caring for their children. Whereas the parents of older children could get away with less monitoring whilst they work.

The mental wellbeing, and quality of work, of many parents of younger children would markedly increase from no longer having to cram full time work *and* full time childcare in 5 days a week. Just not possible to do both to a high standard, and take reasonable care of onesself, all at the same time.

 

[nedchester]

I would imagine that schools will go back as follows.

1st June - Year 6 (possibly 5 )in Primary and Year 10 /12 secondary. Year 6 is to get them prepared for secondary school in September and Year 10/12 as they have important exams next year. Then from early July other year groups mainly for the reason of re-socialisation rather than education as the pupils will (mostly) not have seen their friends for some time ( depending on how the lockdown is being lifted). There are going to be major issues with the mental health of pupils following this event.

One thing we need to be careful of is not transmission between children but between children and adults (both adults at home and teachers). Getting pupils to socially distance in classes is unrealistic especially at primary level.

 

[Qwerty133]

Indeed, I have seen similar reports. For secondary schools I'd like to see the priority to get Year 7 and 8 in school ASAP, partly because of this reason, and also because the younger students are more likely to require supervision, so their parents can get back to work.

I don't think many people realise just how much some students are struggling with this lockdown. I know because I have spoken to some students and some parents. On the other hand some are coping surprisingly well, but that won't last forever.

I will reserve judgement on the actions taken for now, but I do worry that we may not make decisions that are the right decisions for young people. I can never forgive the actions of Spain for example. Anyway time will tell..

The priority in secondary schools has to be years 10 and 12 so that next years exams do not have to be modified to include a narrower range of content, followed by year 9 who need to begin preparing for GCSEs. There is enough content in the KS3 curriculum that can be dropped without too much bother that in educational terms years 7 and 8 aren't that badly effected.

 

[yorkie]

The priority in secondary schools has to be years 10 and 12 so that next years exams do not have to be modified to include a narrower range of content, followed by year 9 who need to begin preparing for GCSEs. There is enough content in the KS3 curriculum that can be dropped without too much bother that in educational terms years 7 and 8 aren't that badly effected.

Yes in theory, but it depends on what the priorities are, whether you focus on keeping the R level down (as it sounds like younger children are going to be passing on the virus a lot less but we don't know how much that tends to increase with age) and increasing the number of parents who will be able to go back to work, or if you focus on preparing for GCSEs (which will already be affected, so some adjustments are going to need to be made regardless).

Obviously without the research the first part is unknown, and they may not want to wait before making a decision.

 

[johnnychips]

The priority in secondary schools has to be years 10 and 12 so that next years exams do not have to be modified to include a narrower range of content, followed by year 9 who need to begin preparing for GCSEs. There is enough content in the KS3 curriculum that can be dropped without too much bother that in educational terms years 7 and 8 aren't that badly effected.

Is this a bit of the tail wagging the dog? Education shouldn’t just be just about exams, especially at 16 as everybody is supposed to be in some sort of education or training till they’re 18 anyway. If exams are that important - or there is that much importance attached to them, you are right. However, for the students’ sake of getting out of the house and their (and their parents!’) mental health, I’d rather see, for example, two school years out of six in every day, rotated.

 

[HH]

So you disagree with him?

I neither agree or disagree with him. You shouldn't jump to assumptions.

 

[HH]

Getting pupils to socially distance in classes is unrealistic especially at primary level.

I think that you'll find that year 6 pupils could mostly handle this. On the other hand, they are 11, or nearly 11, which means they may be able to transmit the virus. Also, by this point of the year they would normally be focussed on SATS, which have been cancelled this year, not on getting ready for secondary school.

If schools go back in years, then maybe year 6 isn't the best one for primary schools.

 

[chris11256]

Have just been sent an all staff email by the Headteacher. At my school senior management have agreed that we require at least 1 weeks notice to reopen, so when the lockdown is rolled-over we'd need to be told by the end of the day on the 22nd for a reopening after half term on the 1st June.

 

[Domh245]

If schools go back in years, then maybe year 6 isn't the best one for primary schools.

They may be more at risk for spreading it, but on the flip side they're more likely to be able to take themselves to school rather than having parents pick up/drop off. Tough choices to be made!

 

[HH]

They may be more at risk for spreading it, but on the flip side they're more likely to be able to take themselves to school rather than having parents pick up/drop off. Tough choices to be made!

I agree. I'd probably pick Year 5 in primary school, because they are still the right side of 11, they are still capable of social distancing, and they are next year's Year 6. After that the younger years (education has a bigger effect the younger you are), but you'd have to have smaller classes than for the older years, and probably not Year 1 - they're just too young and need constant supervision. But that assumes you do it by year, rather than just giving everyone 3 days a week, which is what they have discussed at my son's (teacher) school (and I'm not convinced 3 days for all is doable with existing staff).