How will schools be able to go back in September?

downthemiddle

[Deleted User] wrote: »

I did. Compromises will be an unfortunate consequence of what we are dealing with. Do you believe they would be better off with no hope of access to special needs as they wait at home for thousands of extra teachers to drop out of the ether, rather than get at least some supports in school?

Yet again you present an extreme example as the alternative. It’s a simple question, do you feel the best compromise is to discriminate against those with greatest need?

Smacruairi

[Deleted User] wrote: »

I did. Compromises will be an unfortunate consequence of what we are dealing with. Do you believe they would be better off with no hope of access to special needs as they wait at home for thousands of extra teachers to drop out of the ether, rather than get at least some supports in school?

So what do you say to the parents of that child. "apologies, but sacrifices have to be made for the greater good?".

caveat emptor

caveat emptor wrote: »

• where does it say 30 kids in a portacabin?
• what about the bit where kids over 10 are just as likely to infect adults (accelerate community spread).
• alternating days.
• staggered opening times.
• masks in classes, teacher and kids.

Have you been in a school in a different country?
They are different. Check it out.

Give over. You are transparent at this point.

I have kids in school in this country. And before you retort with I just want them back for childcare, my wife is not working in the medium term at least.

Did or did not Fauci state in that video that at low levels of community transmission schools can go on as normal? Are we not at low levels of transmission? Did he also not state that measures should be ramped up on the basis of each areas status? And finally, have any experts criticised our approach to opening the schools?

downthemiddle

[Deleted User] wrote: »

I have kids in school in this country.

Clearly they don’t have any additional needs.

downthemiddle

downthemiddle wrote: »

Yet again you present an extreme example as the alternative. It’s a simple question, do you feel the best compromise is to discriminate against those with greatest need?

The other option is they don’t get any services in the medium term. If the greater good is the school staying open for all, well that’s unfortunate, but we have to live with the resources we have

Smacruairi

[Deleted User] wrote: »

The other option is they don’t get any services in the medium term. If the greater good is the school staying open for all, well that’s unfortunate, but we have to live with the resources we have

Thanks for giving an answer at least. You would then have several parents lining up to sue the BOM for their approach but at least you answered the question. The solution you gave is not legally workable, so we can discount that. Not to mention ethically and morally abhorrent.

downthemiddle

downthemiddle wrote: »

Clearly they don’t have any additional needs.

Assumptions assumptions- not myself but more than one extended family member, who are all dying to get the kids back to school and at least some level of supports.

Smacruairi

Smacruairi wrote: »

Thanks for giving an answer at least. You would then have several parents lining up to sue the BOM for their approach but at least you answered the question. The solution you gave is not legally workable, so we can discount that.

Schools make compromises every year in the level of additional supports they are able to give. I see that with family members. Resources are going to be even tighter this year so is going to be even tougher. I fail to see what legal recourse anyone would have

khalessi

Deleted User wrote: »

Assumptions assumptions- not myself but more than one extended family member, who are all dying to get the kids back to school and at least some level of supports.

Those level of supports could be gone for the year. As SET I am already precovid pulled out a couple of times a week. It could be for a day or a few hours but thats time from the children who need it. As a parent of a child who avails of learning support for dyslexia I would be very annoyed as it took 2 years to get that help and it is badly needed. Ask your relatives how they would feel if the Support they fought for was gone for a year and the effect it would have on their child.

These kids are already fighting an uphill battle and it is made worse when they dont have regular access to SET.

Lillyfae

khalessi wrote: »

....

Understood. Not agreeing with your point of view means that I’m not entitled to an opinion.

jrosen

Boggles wrote: »

What's the difference?

Schools can not encourage or tell kids to break the law.

There wasn't a mention of it in the "plan" anyway.

Also I am pretty sure there is strict rules in post primary for smart phone usage in schools, for good reason.

Big difference actually.

I never said break the law I said above 16.

Strict rules, yes. But all this would be is an app in their bag. So therefore no harder to manage than a student having instagram on their phone.

But by all means continue to find road blocks.

khalessi

khalessi wrote: »

Those level of supports could be gone for the year. As SET I am already precovid pulled out a couple of times a week. It could be for a day or a few hours but thats time from the children who need it. As a parent of a child who avails of learning support for dyslexia I would be very annoyed as it took 2 years to get that help and it is badly needed. Ask your relatives how they would feel if the Support they fought for was gone for a year and the effect it would have on their child.

These kids are already fighting an uphill battle and it is made worse when they dont have regular access to SET.

It’s not going to be ideal, but we are in the middle of a pandemic. We should endeavour to give all the supports we can, but issues are inevitable

Smacruairi

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Schools make compromises every year in the level of additional supports they are able to give. I see that with family members. Resources are going to be even tighter this year so is going to be even tougher. I fail to see what legal recourse anyone would have

There are compromises and there are the complete omissions you advocated for "for medium term" benefits. It has been explained in numerous ways to you, students who are unable to return to school for health reasons will not have access to a full digital and remote platform as teachers will be busy with the rest of the class. Special teachers who would have been assigned to these students are now being used for sick cover and substitution. There are no further resources to be deployed under your plan so in the medium term, those additional needs will have to be parked until we return to normal regimes, or until the govt provides more resources.

And just as a pointer, parents and children with individual needs don't "compromise", schools accommodate and under your medium term plan there are no accommodations. These are not roadblocks, these are the practicalities of parents quite rightly feeling they have been sidelined in this issue.

downthemiddle

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Assumptions assumptions- not myself but more than one extended family member, who are all dying to get the kids back to school and at least some level of supports.

Thank you for clarifying I was correct. Will you tell your extended family that you think that compromising their right to an education is a price worth paying?

khalessi

Lillyfae wrote: »

Understood. Not agreeing with your point of view means that I’m not entitled to an opinion.

Yeah, weak response. Your opinons of teachers are there for all to see and it is because of your own words I would prefer you not give an opinion, nothing to do disagreeing with me, but for the ignorance of your comments towards teachers.

A lot of people disagree here but like I said we have a stake in the game and at the end of the day, we all want the schools to succeed, some of us are worried for our children, some of us for our colleagues and some for ourselves.

thenetherrealm

Lillyfae wrote: »

Understood. Not agreeing with your point of view means that I’m not entitled to an opinion.

Your lack of recent experience in the Irish education system, your clear biases against Irish teacher, and your refusal to listen to facts means that we have no respect for your opinion.

Boggles

jrosen wrote: »

Big difference actually.

I never said break the law I said above 16.

`

Not at first you didn't.

jrosen wrote: »

Strict rules, yes. But all this would be is an app in their bag. So therefore no harder to manage than a student having instagram on their phone.

But by all means continue to find road blocks.

They ain't my road blocks, I don't set school policy or pass legislation.

downthemiddle

downthemiddle wrote: »

Thank you for clarifying I was correct. Will you tell your extended family that you think that compromising their right to an education is a price worth paying?

Well for them, any level of support is worth more than they had March to June. If we wait for goldplated services before we return, we will be waiting a long time

Alrigghtythen

thenetherrealm wrote: »

Your lack of recent experience in the Irish education system, your clear biases against Irish teacher, and your refusal to listen to facts means that we have no respect for your opinion.

The might have some good ideas they seen working in the country they are in an how it's been managed. Why not be open to new ideas. Instead the excuses on this thread as to why teachers can go back to work have ranged from thier arms are too short to they might get cold.

Smacruairi

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Well for them, any level of support is worth more than they had March to June. If we wait for goldplated services before we return, we will be waiting a long time

Another whataboutery. That's fine, we understand your point. Hoping your family members get the support they can, but remember that the govt, and your own fine self, have not planned for it, or really value their education as the medium term results of the masses is more important.

Smacruairi

Smacruairi wrote: »

Another whataboutery. That's fine, we understand your point. Hoping your family members get the support they can, but remember that the govt, and your own fine self, have not planned for it, or really value their education as the medium term results of the masses is more important.

It’s the exact opposite of whataboutery. I addressed the exact point made by the previous poster, in that many people with children with special needs would prefer some supports to none. An as we work through it we address the gaps as and when we can

caveat emptor

Smacruairi wrote: »

So what do you say to the parents of that child. "apologies, but sacrifices have to be made for the greater good?".

Sums up the argument thus far really. A strategy it is not. Our schools are overpopulated and underinvested in. I spent half my education in a portacabin I'm sure if this pandemic didn't come along my kid would too.

Will take a couple of months to then look back and say.
"What could we have done?"
"How were we to know it spreads so easily"

two words.
care homes and masks.
This is more of the same.

Outcome strategy to get community transmission to level where it won't catch at community level.
Investment and real public health measures in schools.
Question: what mortality/morbidity rate will we suffer before then?

jimmytwotimes 2013

The amount of time wasted on this thread on WUMs is pathetic.

A thread for people who genuinely want to discuss possibilities and challenges of a school return is needed.

Going round in circles with people trying to score points on the teaching profession is fairly sad tbh

jimmytwotimes 2013

jimmytwotimes 2013 wrote: »

The amount of time wasted on this thread on WUMs is pathetic.

A thread for people who genuinely want to discuss possibilities and challenges of a school return is needed.

Going round in circles with people trying to score points on the teaching profession is fairly sad tbh

A difference of opinion is not a windup. There is little to no opinion from any experts in the field as to why a return to school at this time presents a greater risk in Ireland. The schools will face resourcing challenges and decisions when cases arise, but at this time the balance of risk means opening schools is feasible. And for the future generations it’s needed.

the corpo

Deleted User wrote: »

Given the level of disquiet on here about the reopening plans, there must be no end of public health specialists, infectious disease specialists, epidemiologists etc. coming out in public against the plans? It can’t just be unions and opposition politicians

I think this is actually a fair question. I am very disconcerted by this plan, and I think the evidence, internationally, points against it. But why aren't our specialists voicing concern?

My fear is that, like masks, we are behind the curve again on the evidence, but by the time NPHET and the HSE catch up, children will have been back in school for a potentially devastating amount of time....

blanch152

caveat emptor wrote: »

• where does it say 30 kids in a portacabin?
• what about the bit where kids over 10 are just as likely to infect adults (accelerate community spread).
• alternating days.
• staggered opening times.
• masks in classes, teacher and kids.

Have you been in a school in a different country?
They are different. Check it out.

Give over. You are transparent at this point.

Class sizes are bigger in Korea than in Ireland, space is more crowded.

blanch152

Deleted User wrote: »

Given the level of disquiet on here about the reopening plans, there must be no end of public health specialists, infectious disease specialists, epidemiologists etc. coming out in public against the plans? It can’t just be unions and opposition politicians

Good point, I've had a look and I can't find any.

Still only unions and opposition politicians against the plan.

blanch152

Smacruairi wrote: »

So what do you say to the parents of that child. "apologies, but sacrifices have to be made for the greater good?".

It could be worse.

You could be a doctor in a hospital telling a patient you can't get that cancer treatment to keep you alive because the beds are full with coronavirus patients. Actually, hold that, doctors did have to do that.

Some of the complaints on this thread are ludicrous. The science at the moment says that children are low-risk transmitters of the disease. Schools have not contributed to a rise in infection anywhere in the world yet.

Teachers are scared of going back to work, that is understandable, but it is a fear based on ignorance of the science. A surprise in people so well-educated.

caveat emptor

blanch152 wrote: »

It could be worse.

You could be a doctor in a hospital telling a patient you can't get that cancer treatment to keep you alive because the beds are full with coronavirus patients. Actually, hold that, doctors did have to do that.

Some of the complaints on this thread are ludicrous. The science at the moment says that children are low-risk transmitters of the disease. Schools have not contributed to a rise in infection anywhere in the world yet.

Teachers are scared of going back to work, that is understandable, but it is a fear based on ignorance of the science. A surprise in people so well-educated.

Bullsh!t......

I'm not a teacher but given the ambiguity with how people interpret studies around here I'll spoon feed you the question in a format that you might understand.

Can you read the table from the Korean study and tell me the following......

How many contacts of school going kids subsequently tested positive?


Second question....(bit tougher)
What percentage of household contacts of secondary kid, subsequently tested positive relative to those that didn't (total).

I think you'll find the answer surprising.

As cute as Johnny is. He's a granny killer. Might be why they closed the schools in first place.




Here's the link you won't follow and you won't read. It's the only bit of data we actually have. Another study in US will be concluded in December.
https://wwwnc.cdc.gov/eid/article/26/10/20-1315_article

xhomelezz

jrosen wrote: »

Contact tracing will be used, important to encourage all secondary school kids who have phones (which is usually all) to download the app. Will make things faster and easier when they return.

We will just have to accept we will see classes sent home, we will possibly see individual schools close too.

But we are not dealing with small kids either at secondary level, they are old enough to have the risk explained to them. They need to take some personal responsibility too and follow guidelines.
The schools will need to implement rules around movement within their schools, be it close locker rooms, keep kids in their home room class and have the teachers move? That in itself will keep movement to a minimum. Teachers will need to sanitize down the desks as they use them in class, carry a pencil case, use only their own stuff. Perhaps even changing the time table to have more double classes? I know its long but again less movement.

Great idea about covid app, in the size of my son's classroom will be all close contacts I don't think it's possible to have them all back, doesn't matter how much hand sanitizers you gonna throw in. There should be just half of the kids at the school at the time, while applying all the measures. Review after few weeks and see. This approach all in is just recipe for disaster.