How will schools be able to go back in September? (Continued)

irishblessing

combat14 wrote: »

hard to believe schools open in a week or less with Nphet suggesting to government that whole country is on cusp of full lockdown again

https://www.irishtimes.com/news/politics/government-resists-calls-from-nphet-for-a-return-to-full-lockdown-1.4334326?mode=amp

Where is this "13 and over" mindset regarding masks coming from with our government? Research is showing that children aged 10 and older spread the virus at least as well as adults do. Even Mike Ryan of WHO touched on this when speaking with Sarah McInerney. So what the F gives.

Bobtheman

Let me get this right. 20 -16 year olds not allowed gather- anywhere or 20 adults for that matter and yet it's safe for me to teach these young men and women?
Am I missing something??

teachinggal123

PowerToWait wrote: »

So on what information are you basing your opinion of it being a ‘fiasco’? How do you know this in the absence of any data?

Also, how do you know online learning was not entertained?

You don’t, simply making things up.

Seriously, do you know the difference between all these words you are throwing around? "Data" is different to "information".

You do know this a "discussion" board, right? Again, that is different to proving peer-reviewed "Data" or "information".

What exactly are you looking for? There are no peer-reviewed studies on this topic as far as I know.

Loafing Oaf

Bobtheman wrote: »

Let me get this right. 20 16 year olds not allowed father anywhere

Well becoming a parent at that age is certainly not recommended...

wirelessdude01

PowerToWait wrote: »

Right. Is that how it works? Purely political motivation decides educational policy? Even worse than I thought if so.

Thought was was kinda obvious.

wirelessdude01

Lillyfae wrote: »

I sincerely appreciate that comment, because it took you a long time to acknowledge it (not just you, it’s not my intention to give you aggro).

I just think that the ironic thing is that many in government seem to think that a few years in a classroom with 20 odd 7 year olds somehow qualifies them to run a country, not that Minister Foley is a teacher.

She is a secondary teacher by qualification.

khalessi

Lillyfae wrote: »

I sincerely appreciate that comment, because it took you a long time to acknowledge it (not just you, it’s not my intention to give you aggro).

I just think that the ironic thing is that many in government seem to think that a few years in a classroom with 20 odd 7 year olds somehow qualifies them to run a country, not that Minister Foley is a teacher.

Nice editing of comment, I have commented previously on teachers not doing work. What I am acknowledging is the issue of online teaching being relevant.

I do not think what myself or my colleagues or what I have seen mentioned here, with some exceptions, was a shambles.

I have mentioned before I received the once a week email from my kids teachers and the bloody awful Seesaw. I did not have an issue with once a week, I had parents asking me to issue work once a week, but I refused as I judged the work daily on what to send next. I work in learning support and needed to be able to tweak it, based on the student's responses, to suit so daily was best.

What I had an issue with was page numbers of books being issued in Maths for example with no videos or explaniations provided. As I said in the school feedback, fine I am a teacher I know where to look but parents had it difficult enough WFH without having to go look for a video to explain to Johnny or Anne how to do multiplication.

The Dept need to design an online platform which forms a minimum accepted level of work which then can be shaped to suit the individual teacher's needs. Be it a list of explanitory resources accessible by teachers or parents. So hopefully something is in the back pocket

JDD

Bobtheman wrote: »

Let me get this right. 20 -16 year olds not allowed gather- anywhere or 20 adults for that matter and yet it's safe for me to teach these young men and women?
Am I missing something??

They’re not saying it’s safe. They’re putting restrictions on gathering other than schools, to keep community transmission as low as possible, in order to ensure schools stay open for as long as possible. Schools being open is vital to any economic recovery. Gatherings in houses or at matches are not.

Deeec

khalessi wrote: »

Nice editing of comment, I have commented previously on teachers not doing work. What I am acknowledging is the issue of online teaching being relevant.

I do not think what myself or my colleagues or what I have seen mentioned here, with some exceptions, was a shambles.

I have mentioned before I received the once a week email from my kids teachers and the bloody awful Seesaw. I did not have an issue with once a week, I had parents asking me to issue work once a week, but I refused as I judged the work daily on what to send next. I work in learning support and needed to be able to tweak it, based on the student's responses, to suit so daily was best.

What I had an issue with was page numbers of books being issued in Maths for example with no videos or explaniations provided. As I said in the school feedback, fine I am a teacher I know where to look but parents had it difficult enough WFH without having to go look for a video to explain to Johnny or Anne how to do multiplication.

The Dept need to design an online platform which forms a minimum accepted level of work which then can be shaped to suit the individual teacher's needs. Be it a list of explanitory resources accessible by teachers or parents. So hopefully something is in the back pocket

I fully agree with you - this is the exactly the problem I had with homeschooling during lockdown.

irishblessing

Gerry Hatrick wrote: »

The government is just thinking of votes at this stage. If they don't send kids back to school parents will lose the plot with them. I think they know darn well the virus will rapidly accelerate once kids go back and they know they'll have to pull the plug by mid October at the latest.

It's a bonkers approach.

But what's so incredibly beyond stupid, more than your point, is that schools could still have gone ahead. They could have implemented a phased, blended learning plan that would be far safer and much better suited for our society's many needs.
It is completely unacceptable that 1. Guidelines were issued so late
2. Leadership on this did not release a better, safer, more comprehensive plan with remote learning plan b.

They should all be sacked. There is no excuse for this lack of competency when plenty of examples and evidence of success for these models are everywhere.

Warbeastrior

teachinggal123 wrote:

But seen as I've been corrected a few times at this stage in a similar way I thought I'd join the grammar nazi party!!

But you ignored my question.

teachinggal123

khalessi wrote: »

I have mentioned before I received the once a week email from my kids teachers and the bloody awful Seesaw. I did not have an issue with once a week I]email from teachers[/I, I had parents asking me to issue work once a week, but I refused as I judged the work daily on what to send next. I work in learning support and needed to be able to tweak it, based on the student's responses, to suit so daily was best.

That is really worrying. It's also worrying that many teachers on this thread seem to think this level of interaction is acceptable in any way.

HerrKuehn

JDD wrote: »

They’re not saying it’s safe. They’re putting restrictions on gathering other than schools, to keep community transmission as low as possible, in order to ensure schools stay open for as long as possible. Schools being open is vital to any economic recovery. Gatherings in houses or at matches are not.

Exactly, I really don't understand what some find so difficult to understand with this idea.

wirelessdude01

When I was doing the whole online thing I had parents screaming for the whole week's work to be given out on Monday, others wanting it each morning and others wanting it broken up into segments split over each day.
Then trying to organise zoom was a nightmare. One timeslot didn't suit one kid, another day didn't suit another and so on.

If the department provided a set of minimum requirements for both teachers and children/parents then all this nonsense could be avoided. Then there is a somewhat consistent approach yet it still allows each teacher to put their own individual style onto it.

Lillyfae

wirelessdude01 wrote: »

She is a secondary teacher by qualification.

Oh, it’s totally different then. She’s qualified because they were 15, not 7.

khalessi

teachinggal123 wrote: »

That is really worrying. It's also worrying that many teachers on this thread seem to think this level of interaction is acceptable in any way.

Yes and instead of clipping comments out of context read the whole piece. As I explain what the issues are with that.

Even one email a week was more than you did.

To add as a parent WFH I had more to be doing than dealing with zoom classes when I was supposed to be working. My students got work, explanations videos and phonecalls if they required them but each parent is diffeerent.

And as you know I had daily contact with my students but did not need it for my kids. Each parent is different in their requirements. I required the work and explanations.

irishblessing

[/QUOTE]

Warbeastrior wrote: »

How did I generalise can you explain to me?

Hang on - wasn't there a post that said something about anyone criticising teachers should be ashamed of themselves?

While I hold enormous respect for teachers, they can be criticised like anyone else. Especially when said teachers as happened in our school and literally every other parent I know didn't hear from teachers at all at the start of shut down and the height of it was an email once a week and a slew of website suggestions of which we were to pull together our own curriculum from apparently. It was a joke. People will speak to their own experience, no one painted teachers with an entire brush as it was put earlier on - except the post that said anyone criticising teachers should be ashamed.

teachinggal123

wirelessdude01 wrote: »

When I was doing the whole online thing I had parents screaming for the whole week's work to be given out on Monday, others wanting it each morning and others wanting it broken up into segments split over each day.
Then trying to organise zoom was a nightmare. One timeslot didn't suit one kid, another day didn't suit another and so on.

If the department provided a set of minimum requirements for both teachers and children/parents then all this nonsense.coule be avoided. Then there is a somewhat consistent approach yet it still allows each teacher to put their own individual style onto it.

I doubt anyone was actually "screaming". Or is that some kinds metaphor for something?

I think its important to be 'student centred' as opposed to 'student/parent led'. Try to organise classes/content that best suit the students and stick with that. Don't be led by anyone "screaming" at you ... stand up to this ... do what you think can best serve your students.

As for time slots, you cant suit everyone. Organise this as best you can ... again, "student centred" as opposed to 'student led" ... and do your best.

I hope that was helpful.

wirelessdude01

Lillyfae wrote: »

Oh, it’s totally different then. She’s qualified because they were 15, not 7.

Just making sure you have the correct information on the Irish context which doesn't impact on you directly. Hope all is well in the land of tulips.

Bobtheman

irishblessing wrote: »

Hang on - wasn't there a post that said something about anyone criticising teachers should be ashamed of themselves?

While I hold enormous respect for teachers, they can be criticised like anyone else. Especially when said teachers as happened in our school and literally every other parent I know didn't hear from teachers at all at the start of shut down and the height of it was an email once a week and a slew of website suggestions of which we were to pull together our own curriculum from apparently. It was a joke. People will speak to their own experience, no one painted teachers with an entire brush as it was put earlier on - except the post that said anyone criticising teachers should be ashamed.[/QUOTE]

And ranting about it on boards will change that ? Complain to the Board of management. Talk to the principal. If you get nowhere there then try the teaching council. Some schools did better than others. But as stated talking to random strangers will fix nothing. I have outlined a few options there

teachinggal123

khalessi wrote: »

Yes and instead of clipping comments out of context read the whole piece. As I explain what the issues are with that.

Even one email a week was more than you did.

To add as a parent WFH I had more to be doing than dealing with zoom classes when I was supposed to be working. My students got work, explanations videos and phonecalls if they required them but each parent is diffeerent.

And as you know I had daily contact with my students but did not need it for my kids. Each parent is different in their requirements. I required the work and explanations.

Still worrying that a teacher could say one email a week is sufficient.

Do you think that teachers who have to look after (and teach) their own kids, and thus cannot work properly, should be fully paid if schools are closed?

Put slightly differently - should teachers get fully paid if they send one email a week? If you are saying that is 'enough' they why are we needed at all?

Ten of Swords

Stop with the personal remarks, backseat modding and digs at each other. Thread is being constantly derailed by this

Let's move on and keep the discussion on topic

Blondini

teachinggal123 wrote: »

I doubt anyone was actually "screaming". Or is that some kinds metaphor for something?

I think its important to be 'student centred' as opposed to 'student/parent led'. Try to organise classes/content that best suit the students and stick with that. Don't be led by anyone "screaming" at you ... stand up to this ... do what you think can best serve your students.

As for time slots, you cant suit everyone. Organise this as best you can ... again, "student centred" as opposed to 'student led" ... and do your best.

I hope that was helpful.

Serious question. Why don't you post your thoughts over on the teaching forum? That's full of teachers for you to bounce your ideas off.

irishblessing

Alex86Eire wrote: »

Christ I haven't been following this thread for a while but I come back and you're still spouting the same story weeks on!

You have openly admitted doing basically nothing to help your students during lockdown. How can you criticize others when you did nothing yourself??

You should be using this time to try and catch up and sort out your resources in an effort to make up time with them!!!
I have all my schemes edited and ready to go at this stage. Please don't let your students suffer again.

I have read (mostly) all back through this thread and there seems to be some dog piling on this poster teachinggal here. There is no way I can find it again, but didn't she talk about the pressure of the older teachers working against her in approaching remote teaching issue? Then I read about other teachers on here saying they can't speak up to their principals or BOM about certain issues for the same reasons and not wanting to go against them or senior teachers. Not organising strikes or speak outs because it's not their "pay grade." If so and I'm recalling correctly it all seems a bit Pot/kettle to me.

She's young, she's learning and she'll find her feet and voice. Leave it alone already and put the pitchforks down.

wirelessdude01

teachinggal123 wrote: »

I doubt anyone was actually "screaming". Or is that some kinds metaphor for something?

I think its important to be 'student centred' as opposed to 'student/parent led'. Try to organise classes/content that best suit the students and stick with that. Don't be led by anyone "screaming" at you ... stand up to this ... do what you think can best serve your students.

As for time slots, you cant suit everyone. Organise this as best you can ... again, "student centred" as opposed to 'student led" ... and do your best.

I hope that was helpful.

Not really but thanks anyway.

My point was that if the fcuking government gave a sh1t they would have a plan A, B and C to cover different scenarios.

Even the deaf and blind mice in the sewers know that some, most, all schools will be back online as some stage for varying lengths of time over this school year. To stop people like you and your colleagues sitting on their ar$es and doing damn all there needs to be centralised approach. Otherwise we'll have the same ones doing nothing and same ones going above and beyond and loads in the middle working away furiously but maybe not in the most coherent fashion.

Mrsmum

Just watched Micheál Martin getting a tour today of some school in Cork on telly. It certainly didn't look like he was getting any grief.

Murple

Mrsmum wrote: »

Regarding the quote, Is she not a teacher ? In fact are not many government members and politicians teachers ?

Of the current 160 TDS, 19 were teachers or principals so less than an eighth. Of those 19, I don’t know how many had any length of time as a teacher or how many trained as a teacher and left it after a year or two. Joe McHugh for example, the previous Minister for Ed. seems to have taught for 3 years and been a youth worker for as long but he was always just referred to as a teacher (despite not having worked as one since 1996).
Michael Martin is also touted as ‘a teacher’ but he actually only worked for a year as one.

irishblessing

JDD wrote: »

They’re not saying it’s safe. They’re putting restrictions on gathering other than schools, to keep community transmission as low as possible, in order to ensure schools stay open for as long as possible. Schools being open is vital to any economic recovery. Gatherings in houses or at matches are not.

Yes they are- I believe the recent quote was "the classroom is a controlled environment."

Examples from all over the world who implemented full reopening show that to be untrue and a mistake.

teachinggal123

wirelessdude01 wrote: »

Not really but thanks anyway.

No problem, I'm happy to help anytime.

It sounds like you struggled a bit with the online stuff (and were upset by all the people 'screaming' at you). I've been thinking about this a lot and would be very happy to help you out as much as possible and tell you what I'm going to do for online/blended this time. Maybe you could get a few ideas from that?

Anyway, feel free to pm anytime ... I'll help and support you as much as I can.

Warbeastrior

irishblessing wrote:

While I hold enormous respect for teachers, they can be criticised like anyone else. Especially when said teachers as happened in our school and literally every other parent I know didn't hear from teachers at all at the start of shut down and the height of it was an email once a week and a slew of website suggestions of which we were to pull together our own curriculum from apparently. It was a joke. People will speak to their own experience, no one painted teachers with an entire brush as it was put earlier on - except the post that said anyone criticising teachers should be ashamed.

That is incorrect. The poster in question said 'What have they done?'

So while someone may have done a positive generalisation. That other poster replied with a negative generalisation.

I had done neither but I was accused of generalising. Thats what I was responding to.