How will schools be able to go back in September?

tabby aspreme wrote: »

29 people in a 5m/5m room, that's 16ft/16ft in old money.

Sorry I should edit my post. Its 8mx8m.

Dublingirl80

In the current rulings it may not be a mass gathering but it is a gathering of more than is appropriate. The conventional yard set up in schools would be 100 plus so more than was allowed previously. School as a whole would usually be 100 to 1000 children mixing. Even with the restrictions there are common areas, corridors etc. Cleaning practices are a huge issue ans most schools had no sanitizer before they closed. So if you can sort out these issues by all means do. These are just the tip of the iceberg. Children come in with a temperature,where do they go? Children hurt themselves, but nobody can get within 2m to help? I think people who think this will work in a school setting need to volunteer to go in themselves and organise it/work in these conditions. As for children keeping 2m apart, children in the park with their own parents arent doing this so do we really think they will in school all day everyday?

starbaby2003 wrote: »

If parents don’t want to engage that is their prerogative. With regards the laptops implement a scheme where parents can buy them at cost and people who normally get the back to school grant are provided one for free. The point I have been trying to make is- all teachers seem to be providing is what they can’t or won’t do. If anyone questions it they are ‘demonising teachers’ Businesses all over the world have had to adapt and in many cases are making it work. Why not try thinking about what you could do and bring it to your union. Wouldn’t that be a much better help to our children and our economy?

Are you a teacher star baby? Havent read the whole thread so not sure. But that's it us teachers dont want to do anything at all except sit at home and get fully paid. It's an easy life we have.

tabby aspreme

Sammy2012 wrote: »

Secondly in relation to school. My classroom was built in the 1960s. There is no hot water in my room. It is around 5m x 5m so I would only be able to take in maybe 4 children along with myself. I have a class of 28. Some with asthma and other ailments. The children share toilets with 60 other children. 4 stalls for each gender. The children will have to stay away from each other on the yard. This will be very hard to do altho if they only could play with the children from their classroom that might be a way around that. ?

29 people in a 5m/5m room, that's 16ft/16ft in old money.

Do you know what, I think it’s time to just stop feeding the troll.

wirelessdude01 wrote: »

And what do you suggest I do with the two parents who refuse to enroll on my Google classroom for my classes, the parents who won't reply to emails or take my calls or those parents who have said that their child won't be engaging in any of the stuff I do on Google classroom?

Also what do you think should happen in a house where there are 5 school going kids aged from 5 to 18 where there are two laptops and a tablet but where the laptops are needed by parents to WFH? These are actual scenarios in houses across the country.

What about those areas where there is no broadband for either the children or teachers?

If parents don’t want to engage that is their prerogative. With regards the laptops implement a scheme where parents can buy them at cost and people who normally get the back to school grant are provided one for free. The point I have been trying to make is- all teachers seem to be providing is what they can’t or won’t do. If anyone questions it they are ‘demonising teachers’ Businesses all over the world have had to adapt and in many cases are making it work. Why not try thinking about what you could do and bring it to your union. Wouldn’t that be a much better help to our children and our economy?

SnowyMuckish wrote: »

Quote:My classroom was built in the 1960s. There is no hot water in my room. It is around 5m x 5m so I would only be able to take in maybe 4 children along with myself. I have a class of 28. Some with asthma and other ailments. The children share toilets with 60 other children. 4 stalls for each gender. The children will have to stay away from each other on the yard. This will be very hard to do altho if they only could play with the children from their classroom that might be a way around that. The school would have to be fully disinfected each day. Someone mentioned above that if teachers refuse to go back they should have to claim the 350 which is unfair on teachers who might like to go to work but would be in the high risk category.

I think the point the poster was making was how going back would be a logistical nightmare and unsafe for both students or teachers in high risk categories.

Quote: Anyone working directly with the public has always been at higher risk of infection. Those are just facts.

I don’t think it is responsible to put anyone in any profession or any child who has a underlying condition back into the public domain.

This is the point I was trying to make. Thanks SnowyMuckisy. I'm not refusing to go to work and I would consider myself healthy. I would rarely be sick as I am in constant contact with germs.

Someone mentioned above that people will continue to work from home when this happens. This is not true for some. My husband will have to go back to work when his office opens as in his job he needs to meet the public. He has enough work for this week but after that hell have to go back to meet his clients. So they're office will be opening for some of the time if the restrictions are relaxed somewhat on May 5th.

And yes we will have to learn how to live along side the virus until there is a vaccine but the plans need to be well thought not. There is no quick fix for this.

A side note also would be I couldn't understand why they cancelled the leaving Cert until August. Could they not just have told all the primary teachers to facilitate the exams in their classrooms to reduce the numbers in each exam centre and have had it in June. Got that out of the way for students first.

antgal23

I work in a special needs school, 6 kids in a class with three adults, rooms are quite small. Each class has a toilet which all kids use or are changed in.

There are 25 mini buses with up to 8 kids in each that transport the kids each day.

Most if the kids are immuno- compromised.

I think Harris won't give us much guidance when we return and will be left to the schools themselves.

wirelessdude01

starbaby2003 wrote: »

30 people in a classroom is not a mass gathering. You are comparing apples with oranges here. implying people are requesting to send teachers and kids into a war zone. Should nurses and doctors just not go to work? Parents can make decisions about their own kids safety and perform a risk assessment themselves so you should remove that from your argument too. If teachers don’t want to reopen schools that is fine but they need to provide lessons for full days across an internet platform exactly like colleges are.

And what do you suggest I do with the two parents who refuse to enroll on my Google classroom for my classes, the parents who won't reply to emails or take my calls or those parents who have said that their child won't be engaging in any of the stuff I do on Google classroom?

Also what do you think should happen in a house where there are 5 school going kids aged from 5 to 18 where there are two laptops and a tablet but where the laptops are needed by parents to WFH? These are actual scenarios in houses across the country.

What about those areas where there is no broadband for either the children or teachers?

SAXA

â€œIâ€™d like to see a situation whereby our schools could come back or at least could come partially back. Now I canâ€™t guarantee the timeline for this, but in terms of youâ€™re asking me the hierarchy of things, Iâ€™d like to see comeback that would be one of them,â€ he said.

Very non committal and at best aspirational..

antgal23

I think when Harris refers to schools returning he is referring to secondary level only, maybe LC classes whch I imagine are smaller and will follow social distancing

They said restrictions would be lifted in reverse order so surely movement would go first, then retail, bars , with schools last?

With that logic they are gradually increasing the numbers who congregate in one place whilst observing infections and testing and treating

starbaby2003 wrote: »

If teachers don’t want to reopen schools that is fine but they need to provide lessons for full days across an internet platform exactly like colleges are.

Teachers like everyone else want life to return to normal, when it is safe and practical to do so. Demonizing teachers here will solve nothing.

Teachers are working hard from home to provide the best support they can for their students under the current conditions.

As for full lessons all day long... yes in a college setting with adults this is practical. With 30 junior infants online all day, how would that work, is someone going to sit beside them at home the entire day to keep their focus?

starbaby2003 wrote: »

30 people in a classroom is not a mass gathering. You are comparing apples with oranges here. implying people are requesting to send teachers and kids into a war zone. Should nurses and doctors just not go to work? Parents can make decisions about their own kids safety and perform a risk assessment themselves so you should remove that from your argument too. If teachers don’t want to reopen schools that is fine but they need to provide lessons for full days across an internet platform exactly like colleges are.

I am a nurse and also a teacher. Pre Covid safety equipment and infection control was implemented in hospitals to prevent spread of disease. It is one of the reasons traditional nursing uniforms with nurse hats was gotten rid of as someone swabbed the hats and they were covered in germs. Now in Covid era that ppe has been stepped up significantly.

30 people in a room is not a mass gathering but 30 children who don't adhere to basic hygiene at the best of times can be. It just takes some planning to be put into place. Use public spaces split classes properly. All that is asked for is proper planning not just opening schools for 1 million children.

starbaby2003 wrote: »

Ok- if I am a bus driver and I cannot work due to concerns about my safety, I will not get my full wage.
My question was not about providing safety equipment - It is, if all requested safety equipment is provided and a teacher refuses to work; should they get their full wage ?

Of course they shouldn't.

Home schooling might be a thing for a while.

Dublingirl80 wrote: »

This is just untrue, schools are the definition of a mass gathering. That's the reason why they were the first to close. Packed pubs, restaurants, events, they all carry the same issue. The environment teachers work in should mean everyone is 2m apart/perspex screens etc if necessary, all of that, way better hygiene practices ...teachers are entitled to their safety and health as well as all the children's safety and health being looked after in the same way thay other jobs has been. It's a logistical nightmare the whole idea.

30 people in a classroom is not a mass gathering. You are comparing apples with oranges here. implying people are requesting to send teachers and kids into a war zone. Should nurses and doctors just not go to work? Parents can make decisions about their own kids safety and perform a risk assessment themselves so you should remove that from your argument too. If teachers don’t want to reopen schools that is fine but they need to provide lessons for full days across an internet platform exactly like colleges are.

starbaby2003 wrote: »

Ok- if I am a bus driver and I cannot work due to concerns about my safety, I will not get my full wage.
My question was not about providing safety equipment - It is, if all requested safety equipment is provided and a teacher refuses to work; should they get their full wage ?

That is an ecumenical matter:D

I said above I would not work if no ppe basically cause I was pd off, it happens. I have ppe and will work wearing it but can guarantee you I will be told not to as it will scare the children.

That is what the covid payment is for, so yes if they dont have a medical reason and if reasonable safety measures are properly in place

I have 2 conditions on the list for precautions but I want to work as I do a better job face to face then online, as my kids ask me questions face to face but are they are reticent to ask them online. I miss the banter and their faces as we work.

starbaby2003 wrote: »

Ok- if I am a bus driver and I cannot work due to concerns about my safety, I will not get my full wage.
My question was not about providing safety equipment - It is, if all requested safety equipment is provided and a teacher refuses to work; should they get their full wage ?

I don’t think safety masks or other safety equipment is practical in a classroom, you need to ‘speak’ audibly to teach, this wouldn’t be practical.

SnowyMuckish wrote: »

Quote:My classroom was built in the 1960s. There is no hot water in my room. It is around 5m x 5m so I would only be able to take in maybe 4 children along with myself. I have a class of 28. Some with asthma and other ailments. The children share toilets with 60 other children. 4 stalls for each gender. The children will have to stay away from each other on the yard. This will be very hard to do altho if they only could play with the children from their classroom that might be a way around that. The school would have to be fully disinfected each day. Someone mentioned above that if teachers refuse to go back they should have to claim the 350 which is unfair on teachers who might like to go to work but would be in the high risk category.

I think the point the poster was making was how going back would be a logistical nightmare and unsafe for both students or teachers in high risk categories.

Quote: Anyone working directly with the public has always been at higher risk of infection. Those are just facts.

I don’t think it is responsible to put anyone in any profession or any child who has a underlying condition back into the public domain.

Parents of at high risk children should get an option to send their kids back. Also, as previously stated if a teacher has an underlying condition that puts them more at risk their sickness policy would kick in. Perhaps the two could be married and teachers who cannot return to the classroom could teach high risk children who are also unable to return via webex. I never said people should be put in danger, I merely pointed out a fact. In the same way people who commute to work in public transport are more at risk.

Dublingirl80

starbaby2003 wrote: »

It is no more unfair on teachers than it is on thousands of others who are unable to work due to being high risk or having high risk people in their homes. If I turn the question around, why should teachers be treated better than other workers if we are all in this together? If people are medically at risk surely a sick policy would come into play. Anyone working directly with the public has always been at higher risk of infection. Those are just facts.

This is just untrue, schools are the definition of a mass gathering. That's the reason why they were the first to close. Packed pubs, restaurants, events, they all carry the same issue. The environment teachers work in should mean everyone is 2m apart/perspex screens etc if necessary, all of that, way better hygiene practices ...teachers are entitled to their safety and health as well as all the children's safety and health being looked after in the same way thay other jobs has been. It's a logistical nightmare the whole idea.

starbaby2003 wrote: »

If I turn the question around, why should teachers be treated better than other workers if we are all in this together?

Quote:My classroom was built in the 1960s. There is no hot water in my room. It is around 5m x 5m so I would only be able to take in maybe 4 children along with myself. I have a class of 28. Some with asthma and other ailments. The children share toilets with 60 other children. 4 stalls for each gender. The children will have to stay away from each other on the yard. This will be very hard to do altho if they only could play with the children from their classroom that might be a way around that. The school would have to be fully disinfected each day. Someone mentioned above that if teachers refuse to go back they should have to claim the 350 which is unfair on teachers who might like to go to work but would be in the high risk category.

I think the point the poster was making was how going back would be a logistical nightmare and unsafe for both students or teachers in high risk categories.

Quote: Anyone working directly with the public has always been at higher risk of infection. Those are just facts.

I don’t think it is responsible to put anyone in any profession or any child who has a underlying condition back into the public domain.

khalessi wrote: »

Teachers are looking for safe environment not different to anyone else, safe for the children, for the staff, for the families.

Yes schools have to open, Denmark brought in restrctions for schools, they coopted other buildings such as museums to use as temporary teaching spaces, small classes of about 6 students and handwashing 2 hourly and proper daily cleaning. All teachers want is a safe environment, a well thought plan for opening. As you say why should we be treated better then other workers, such as cashiers or bus drivers who got spit screens for health and safety, in a pandemic.

Ok- if I am a bus driver and I cannot work due to concerns about my safety, I will not get my full wage.
My question was not about providing safety equipment - It is, if all requested safety equipment is provided and a teacher refuses to work; should they get their full wage ?

JDD

There’s 24 kids in my daughters JI class, 26 in the older ones 2nd class. 8 in the classroom, along with a teacher, would probably be enough distancing. I’d say it’ll be a shortened day, 9-12 say, with no outside break time. This isn’t going to make a blind bit of difference to people who work from home currently, so I don’t see what the concern is about Creche’s and after schools. The point of the one day a week is is to help the kids education, not to allow parents to go back to the office. I have a 3 year old which will need minding anyway.

This step will increase infections, of course it will. All reductions in restrictions will. More kids who attend school will get it, and therefore spread it. They’ll touch infected tables, they’ll share pencils, they’ll cough, they’ll probably hug each other. How much will infections go up? Who knows.

But we can’t have the schools closed for another 12 months. So we’ll have to live with some form of school in place, alongside the virus, before a vaccine. And this one day a week thing, to start with, seems sensible.

starbaby2003 wrote: »

It is no more unfair on teachers than it is on thousands of others who are unable to work due to being high risk or having high risk people in their homes. If I turn the question around, why should teachers be treated better than other workers if we are all in this together? If people are medically at risk surely a sick policy would come into play. Anyone working directly with the public has always been at higher risk of infection. Those are just facts.

Teachers are looking for safe environment not different to anyone else, safe for the children, for the staff, for the families.

Yes schools have to open, Denmark brought in restrctions for schools, they coopted other buildings such as museums to use as temporary teaching spaces, small classes of about 6 students and handwashing 2 hourly and proper daily cleaning. All teachers want is a safe environment, a well thought plan for opening. As you say why should we be treated better then other workers, such as cashiers or bus drivers who got spit screens for health and safety, in a pandemic.

Sammy2012 wrote: »

Okay theres a few problems here. Firstly from my own person situation I have one primary child and one in creche. Currently husband is working from home but I assume once this stage passed he will return to work. I would usually have no problem going to work as my parents would mind the kids. But now unfortunately they are both in the vulnerable category as they cannot. So what would happen to my kids when I was in work?

Secondly in relation to school. My classroom was built in the 1960s. There is no hot water in my room. It is around 5m x 5m so I would only be able to take in maybe 4 children along with myself. I have a class of 28. Some with asthma and other ailments. The children share toilets with 60 other children. 4 stalls for each gender. The children will have to stay away from each other on the yard. This will be very hard to do altho if they only could play with the children from their classroom that might be a way around that. The school would have to be fully disinfected each day. Someone mentioned above that if teachers refuse to go back they should have to claim the 350 which is unfair on teachers who might like to go to work but would be in the high risk category.

This one day a week return will not help families get back to work. It will cause a logistical nightmare for parents. Who is going to collect them at 1.30.or 2.30 if there is no afterschool care available? Or if they have to stay away from grandparents?

It is no more unfair on teachers than it is on thousands of others who are unable to work due to being high risk or having high risk people in their homes. If I turn the question around, why should teachers be treated better than other workers if we are all in this together? If people are medically at risk surely a sick policy would come into play. Anyone working directly with the public has always been at higher risk of infection. Those are just facts.

Okay theres a few problems here. Firstly from my own person situation I have one primary child and one in creche. Currently husband is working from home but I assume once this stage passed he will return to work. I would usually have no problem going to work as my parents would mind the kids. But now unfortunately they are both in the vulnerable category as they cannot. So what would happen to my kids when I was in work?

Secondly in relation to school. My classroom was built in the 1960s. There is no hot water in my room. It is around 8m x 8m so I would only be able to take in maybe 4 children along with myself. I have a class of 28. Some with asthma and other ailments. The children share toilets with 60 other children. 4 stalls for each gender. The children will have to stay away from each other on the yard. This will be very hard to do altho if they only could play with the children from their classroom that might be a way around that. The school would have to be fully disinfected each day. Someone mentioned above that if teachers refuse to go back they should have to claim the 350 which is unfair on teachers who might like to go to work but would be in the high risk category.

This one day a week return will not help families get back to work. It will cause a logistical nightmare for parents. Who is going to collect them at 1.30.or 2.30 if there is no afterschool care available? Or if they have to stay away from grandparents?

starbaby2003 wrote: »

Yes if they request it of course. I never said they shouldn’t. I said teachers who refuse to teach should get the covid payment. What is the problem with that ? I would not think it as necessary for me to wear PPE. I don’t feel I am at risk nor is anyone in my home. Honestly you sound neurotic at the moment. All you are doing is posting on boards non stop. You should really consider a break from social media.

Thank you for your concern. Normally people read posts in the tone they would post them and I am not being neurotic at all.

I have PPe and will use it and will teach.

Regardless of what I sound like.

All I am asking is for schools to be opened safely for the children, colleagues me and my kids no more then anyone else posting.

You are lucky no one is at risk in your home. I have a home with CF cancer and other lung conditions in it but everyone is different

khalessi wrote: »

I do as everyone is entitled to safety, cashiers got spit screens. bus drivers got the plastic screen. They should all be provided with safety. Do you think teachers should be?

Yes if they request it of course. I never said they shouldn’t. I said teachers who refuse to teach should get the covid payment. What is the problem with that ? I would not think it as necessary for me to wear PPE. I don’t feel I am at risk nor is anyone in my home. Honestly you sound neurotic at the moment. All you are doing is posting on boards non stop. You should really consider a break from social media.