How will schools be able to go back in September?

kowloonkev · 21-05-2020 10:43am

kandr10 wrote: »

Yeah I wouldn’t be keen for my child to be part of a trial run I have to say. Not when we’re still at a stage of not having had Proper contact with family and friends. Seems bonkers.

Family and friends would be an uncontrolled environment.

It's fine that some parents don't want to send their kids to school when the risk to the kids and the parents is almost zero.

But there are just as many, if not more parents who don't want their children socially stunted.

For those who don't want schools to reopen, would you be happy for schools to reopen if your child wasn't attending, or does the selfishness extend to wanting all the kids in the country socially stunted?

ldy4mxonucwsq6 · 21-05-2020 10:43am

khalessi wrote: »

There are also several reports to the contrary such as the one from Johns Hopkins University, which indicates that children are as suseptable to catching and spreading the virus as adults. There has has been an outbreak in France with the sd we have seen in the media. At least an open plan office has circulating air, in some schools they can't open the windows properly.

And the French minister for education has confirmed that almost all of those new cases originated outside of the school.

khalessi · 21-05-2020 10:48am

Zahir Bitter Cellist wrote: »

And the French minister for education has confirmed that almost all of those new cases originated outside of the school.

Almost,

And the research from Johns Hopkins?

plodder · 21-05-2020 10:56am

Zahir Bitter Cellist wrote: »

And the French minister for education has confirmed that almost all of those new cases originated outside of the school.

The reason being that the uptick occurred too soon after the schools re-opened to have been caused by the re-opening.

plodder · 21-05-2020 10:59am

khalessi wrote: »

Almost,

And the research from Johns Hopkins?

The thing is that empirical evidence from the ground has to trump predictive models based on research. There could be other factors at play such as the Summer weather suppressing the virus naturally, which could be a justification for a short term plan for the remainder of the school year, distinct from the long term one.

downthemiddle · 21-05-2020 11:01am

Zahir Bitter Cellist wrote: »

And yet again because someone has different views they are mocked.

I make no apologies for poking fun at someone who openly admits a willingness to experiment with more than half a million children. If you feel that you are in a position to defend such a perspective feel free to do so. I’m sure many posters would be interested in seeing you put a cogent argument in place for such an experiment.

ldy4mxonucwsq6 · 21-05-2020 11:01am

khalessi wrote: »

Almost,

And the research from Johns Hopkins?

Haven't read it, perhaps you'd be so kind to link it so that I can.

Murple · 21-05-2020 11:02am

plodder wrote: »

In fairness, the evidence, from Denmark (haven't checked the others) is that opening primary schools has not resulted in spreading.

Look at the numbers for Denmark. They have had much lower numbers all along than we do and they have been in decline for longer than ours have.
Each country needs to look at their own figures and make decisions accordingly.

thomasdylan · 21-05-2020 11:05am

khalessi wrote: »

Almost,

And the research from Johns Hopkins?

I don't think that research said that children were as likely to spread it as adults. Infection rate was similar but I cant see anything on rates of children spreading it. I may have missed something though.

ldy4mxonucwsq6 · 21-05-2020 11:06am

downthemiddle wrote: »

I make no apologies for poking fun at someone who openly admits a willingness to experiment with more than half a million children. If you feel that you are in a position to defend such a perspective feel free to do so. I’m sure many posters would be interested in seeing you put a cogent argument in place for such an experiment.

So your automatic defense is to slag and mock people instead of rational debate, same yesterday where a number of posters descended into mockery.

Not a good reflection on your profession really.

I can agree or disagree with someone's viewpoint without turning it into something like a gang of playground bullies and my opinion is not better or more important than anyone else's neither is yours.

plodder · 21-05-2020 11:12am

downthemiddle wrote: »

I make no apologies for poking fun at someone who openly admits a willingness to experiment with more than half a million children. If you feel that you are in a position to defend such a perspective feel free to do so. I’m sure many posters would be interested in seeing you put a cogent argument in place for such an experiment.

If it weren't for other countries prepared to do these "experiments" then we wouldn't even know what we currently do about the rate of spreading among children. It was previously assumed (including by me) that children were super-spreaders and "petri-dishes". If every country followed us, then that would still be the conventional wisdom.

More importantly, the message coming from government consistently now is that we are going to have to live with the virus for a number of years. Widespread vaccine availability is still a long way off.

That means we are going to have to try things, and if they don't work, back off and try something else. Call it an experiment if you like.

plodder · 21-05-2020 11:15am

Murple wrote: »

Look at the numbers for Denmark. They have had much lower numbers all along than we do and they have been in decline for longer than ours have.
Each country needs to look at their own figures and make decisions accordingly.

How does that change anything other than the fact that Denmark is a couple of weeks ahead of us?

khalessi · 21-05-2020 11:17am

plodder wrote: »

That means we are going to have to try things, and if they don't work, back off and try something else. Call it an experiment if you like.

Yes but most experiments are planned and other countries have a plan, all anyone has said here are give guidelines. Dont throw kids to the wolves. Every other country is practicising sd, some have masks and face shields for students in schools, some have smaller classes of 9 kids, hand washing protocols, using other buildings such as museums to teach in, all sorted before the children went back. These are just some examples of what they are doing.

So lets follow Europe and get guidelines like they have.

downthemiddle · 21-05-2020 11:19am

Zahir Bitter Cellist wrote: »

So your automatic defense is to slag and mock people instead of rational debate, same yesterday where a number of posters descended into mockery.

Not a good reflection on your profession really.

I can agree or disagree with someone's viewpoint without turning it into something like a gang of playground bullies and my opinion is not better or more important than anyone else's neither is yours.

You referenced a report yesterday and made certain statements regarding teacher supply. I linked the report and ask you to backup your assertions. You avoided the question.
You then made sweeping generalisations about schools, classrooms and teachers pulling the bullying card in the process without producing any evidence of being bullied or showing any understanding of what bullying actually is. It is demeaning to genuine victims to bandy around such a term so recklessly.

pwurple · 21-05-2020 11:33am

I think the long term impact on children's development should be at the core of the approach.

Realistically, it's over here. We've done a good job. We are even below our normal baseline level of deaths in the country at the moment. For example, on a normal day 25-30 people die from cancer. It's down sub 20 for this virus. Yet, we're still stopped on cancer tests and diagnoses here... to treat the virus. That needs to come back around to the correct balance. We're all going to die of something, the novelty of this particular disease is going to wear off at some stage. Contact tracing will be important to get right over the next few weeks.

Children for the most part, not affected by the virus. What they are affected by is a lack of social contact with their peers, and a lack of education. For every super-teacher who is pulling out all the stops and making distance learning work, there is a corresponding teacher who refuses to participate. Some parents have the means to pay for private tutors to teach their kids, some are turning on the TV and trying to work while the kids are also in the house. A large cohort of our children are being neglected in terms of education and social contact. This can have an impact for a whole generation. The longer we leave it unaddressed, the more severe that impact will be.

Flimsy_Boat · 21-05-2020 11:39am

pwurple wrote: »

I think the long term impact on children's development should be at the core of the approach.

Realistically, it's over here. We've done a good job. We are even below our normal baseline level of deaths in the country at the moment. For example, on a normal day 25-30 people die from cancer. It's down sub 20 for this virus. Yet, we're still stopped on cancer tests and diagnoses here... to treat the virus. That needs to come back around to the correct balance. We're all going to die of something, the novelty of this particular disease is going to wear off at some stage. Contact tracing will be important to get right over the next few weeks.

Children for the most part, not affected by the virus. What they are affected by is a lack of social contact with their peers, and a lack of education. For every super-teacher who is pulling out all the stops and making distance learning work, there is a corresponding teacher who refuses to participate. Some parents have the means to pay for private tutors to teach their kids, some are turning on the TV and trying to work while the kids are also in the house. A large cohort of our children are being neglected in terms of education and social contact. This can have an impact for a whole generation. The longer we leave it unaddressed, the more severe that impact will be.

The incidence rate of cancer will not increase to the same degree as Covid-19. The virus incidence can increase 10 fold in a month.

iamwhoiam · 21-05-2020 11:47am

Flimsy_Boat wrote: »

The incidence rate of cancer will not increase to the same degree as Covid-19. The virus incidence can increase 10 fold in a month.

The incidence of untreatable cancer will increase if the tests that detect early cancers are not back in place soon . Cancers may not increase but because of undetected cases the impact will

iamwhoiam · 21-05-2020 11:52am

downthemiddle wrote: »

You referenced a report yesterday and made certain statements regarding teacher supply. I linked the report and ask you to backup your assertions. You avoided the question.
You then made sweeping generalisations about schools, classrooms and teachers pulling the bullying card in the process without producing any evidence of being bullied or showing any understanding of what bullying actually is. It is demeaning to genuine victims to bandy around such a term so recklessly.

While I wouldn’t call it bullying , the circling of the wagons and mockery was not nice to read . Even a mod asked posters to stop . Call it what you like but it wasn’t pleasant and veiled in a “ joke “

pwurple · 21-05-2020 11:55am

Flimsy_Boat wrote: »

The incidence rate of cancer will not increase to the same degree as Covid-19. The virus incidence can increase 10 fold in a month.

Which is why contact tracing is important, as I noted in my post.

Flimsy_Boat · 21-05-2020 12:02pm

iamwhoiam wrote: »

The incidence of untreatable cancer will increase if the tests that detect early cancers are not back in place soon . Cancers may not increase but because of undetected cases the impact will

This is all a matter of degree. How comparable is saving people with screening programmes to the loss of life from this virus?

I am all for screening programmes, but the number of lives they save is actually pretty low. But when we aren't being threatened by an incurable virus that has no vaccine, the screening programmes do seem worth it.

I just finished 1st year of medical school and wrote my epidemiology exam yesterday. I was personally shocked that breast cancer screening, for example, only saves 1% more women. Meanwhile, cervical cancer screening scares a lot of women because they get an abnormal pap and 95% of those abnormal cell changes will be dealt with by the immune system within 2 years anyway. Of the remaining 5% that have persistent infections, only a few them will ever go on to develop cervical cancer. But we put up with scaring 1000s of women to save a few women. During a pandemic though, how useful is this?

Nevermind that a lot of increased survival statistics are really just lead-time bias.

ldy4mxonucwsq6 · 21-05-2020 12:03pm

pwurple wrote: »

Which is why contact tracing is important, as I noted in my post.

Yes definitely, I think if they can get on top of this and get the testing and contact tracing done swiftly then that's going to go a long way towards us returning to normal.

Combined with antibody testing and current low case numbers we should be optimistic that this thing won't shut us down again.

Boggles · 21-05-2020 12:07pm

iamwhoiam wrote: »

The incidence of untreatable cancer will increase if the tests that detect early cancers are not back in place soon . Cancers may not increase but because of undetected cases the impact will

There is quite a bit of scare mongering by a couple of politicians around this at the moment, "explosion" in cancer cases.

The sad reality is that screening as tool in certain cancers has a marginal effect on mortality rates.

Screening is very important and needs to be brought back as soon as it is safe to do so, but the doomsday scenarios been painted are simply false.

iamwhoiam · 21-05-2020 12:12pm

Boggles wrote: »

There is quite a bit of scare mongering by a couple of politicians around this at the moment, "explosion" in cancer cases.

The sad reality is that screening as tool in certain cancers has a marginal effect on mortality rates.

Screening is very important and needs to be brought back as soon as it is safe to do so, but the doomsday scenarios been painted are simply false.

Sadly I know a family member who’s cancer surgery was cancelled for April the 2nd . It was a newly diagnosed tumour and the surgery was to remove it while its still grade 1 . She has heard nothing since and no sign of a re schedule . I am sad for her as she is naturally anxious . She is not alone in this either

ldy4mxonucwsq6 · 21-05-2020 12:33pm

More promising research, things are starting to look better thankfully.

"we have seen no major outbreaks among school children in Sweden, despite the fact that schools and kindergartens have remained open throughout the pandemic".

https://www.news-medical.net/amp/news/20200520/Children-not-likely-to-be-main-drivers-of-COVID-19-pandemic-review-suggests.aspx

The new study, published in the journal Acta Paediatrica, said there had not been a single reported case of a child or teacher catching Covid-19 in school in Sweden - where schools never closed.

Boggles · 21-05-2020 1:03pm

daydorunrun wrote: »

The principal sent no acknowledgment of the fact the current situation will likely carry on till September

You want the principle to give you the exact information you all ready have?

Nobody knows what is going to happen, teachers, principles, you, me or the governance, so using that as a stick to beat the principle is bizarre.

kandr10 · 21-05-2020 1:06pm

kowloonkev wrote: »

Family and friends would be an uncontrolled environment.

It's fine that some parents don't want to send their kids to school when the risk to the kids and the parents is almost zero.

But there are just as many, if not more parents who don't want their children socially stunted.

For those who don't want schools to reopen, would you be happy for schools to reopen if your child wasn't attending, or does the selfishness extend to wanting all the kids in the country socially stunted?

I’m confident my child won’t be socially stunted though. She’s doing fine! I’m grateful for that. I know there’s plenty of kids, probably older than my own, who wouldn’t be coping as well. I also know I’m not in a minority though. I saw a couple of tv polls that indicated 80% of parents were happy to wait til sept and over 70% we’re happy at the rate at which restrictions were being eased. I know these are not official cso quality surveys or anything but it’s an indication. What have you seen to suggest most parents would want their kids back? Is it anecdotal?

kandr10 · 21-05-2020 1:07pm

Zahir Bitter Cellist wrote: »

And the French minister for education has confirmed that almost all of those new cases originated outside of the school.

But can’t they be spread within the school regardless?

ldy4mxonucwsq6 · 21-05-2020 1:08pm

Boggles wrote: »

You want the principle to give you the exact information you all ready have?

Nobody knows what is going to happen, teachers, principles, you, me or the governance, so using that as a stick to beat the principle is bizarre.

I don't think it's too much to ask them to touch base now and again.

After all they are working hard from home.

Principals for two of my kids schools issue a weekly comms and while there may be nothing new or much actual detail it's still a worthwhile exercise. I actually hear more from the principal than the teacher some weeks.

daydorunrun · 21-05-2020 1:08pm

Boggles wrote: »

You want the principle to give you the exact information you all ready have?

Nobody knows what is going to happen, teachers, principles, you, me or the governance, so using that as a stick to beat the principle is bizarre.

No, I don’t need my hand held. But some acknowledgement that people are struggling to juggle everything, perhaps some words of encouragement rather than a payment link would have been nice. It’s called leadership, the lack of it shows a detachment from the reality families are facing.

Personally for my family we’ve managed well and have used the lockdown to work on weaknesses. I know many others I’ve spoken to haven’t fared as well.

Boggles · 21-05-2020 1:11pm

Zahir Bitter Cellist wrote: »

I don't think it's too much to ask them to touch base now and again.

You are not a base.

Again no one knows what is happening, getting principles or teachers to acknowledge that is as weird as is pointless.

How will schools be able to go back in September?

Comments