downthemiddle wrote: » Having read the document and having had time to digest it I’m left with more questions than answers. If it is safe to reopen schools in this manner it really begs the question why they were closed in the first place. Why hasn’t there been a full reopening of Irish society? Why are pubs closed? Why is the Dail sitting in the conference centre? Students have to wear masks on the bus to school, they have to wear masks when they go to the shops, what transformation occurs when they enter a school building?
Lillyfae wrote: » I just don't understand half the people on this thread. Previously it was: "they won't give us the money for soap and hot water" but now that there's €375,000,000 earmarked it's "but there's no masks". Posts a few weeks ago were bemoaning the fact that that the pubs were going to be open before the schools, now they're more along the lines of how can the schools go back when it's not safe to open the pubs. There's a real opportunity here to upgrade the schools in a way that was never possible before. To finally staff buildings adequately. From what I gather, not all schools will require upgrading thankfully, so the money will be shared amongst those that are most in need. The ball is firmly in the court of the Boards of Management and the principals now to start doing the work that needs to be done. This is where months of preparation would have come in very handy indeed. If a school's management can't, er, manage then they're not the right people for the job. As a side note, I have a suspicion that sub teachers will (rightly) be centrally sourced and then deployed as necessary when needed for sick cover. This would be the most prudent way to manage it, but I would imagine the Unions not getting on board with it.
khalessi wrote: » Those same problems are there for 4th 5th and 6th, that has been mentioned a few times here.
sideswipe wrote: » I'm not a teacher so don't know the in's and out's of potential issues with the road map. I do think the more serious issues will be at secondary level were a classroom of pupils is basically a room of adults.
sideswipe wrote: » Are kids tests the same as adults i.e. long Q Tip up the nose to scrape the back of the throat? I'd have to sedate or strap down our 9yr old to do that one!!
Lillyfae wrote: » . I see secondary schools as less of a problem. Children are older so can be made cognizant of the risks. It's possible to leave them unattended for half an hour. They can work independently and can use technology for support. The secondary schools themselves have more funding, are larger, and are generally in better nick than primary schools.
jimmytwotimes 2013 wrote: » No 2nd level student is to be left on their own for any period of time. Those days are long gone, if anything went wrong school management would be in court
Lillyfae wrote: » If they're at home on the Khan academy website the school management is going to be in court? This is what I mean, how can anyone put anything in place when the organisation is full of this arm waving incoherence??
€4.2 million to enable schools to employ an aide to implement the logistical changes needed in schools – moving furniture, changing classroom layouts, set up hand sanitising stations, signage etc.
Lillyfae wrote: » To be fair though, despite what they think, neither do teachers. They can throw up all the scientific research they want to but they have BAs and not BScs so their understanding is as limited as the research itself at this point.
average_runner wrote: » 2 kids, one going to 2nd class and the other 4th class. Guidelines are not too bad. Only big question I have, will each school be allocated a GP. Our school was designed pretty well to deal with this as all entrances to the classroom are directly from the yard. We were with our GP two weeks ago and he said there is no way he cant test everyone that comes in with a temp, won't have the capacity to do it. Down the country and traveling on buses is another issue
Boggles wrote: » The vast majority of the 375m is for staffing. Are they going to "staff" in the yard? I'm not seeing a lot of money for upgrading the schools? There is this. An "aide"? Da fuq?
Boggles wrote: » An "aide"? Da fuq?
wirelessdude01 wrote: » Think you already know the answer to that. At the health briefing yesterday they were asked a question about testing and schools and they openly replied that they hadn't been included or consulted with regards to schools and testing.
glack wrote: » Think of schools with teaching principals. An aid would be hugely helpful as they can deal with the day to day logistics so the principal can teach. I actually like the idea of an aid in each school. Hiring an appropriate person will be the challenge there.
Redordeadqwwer wrote: » I still cannot figure out where the teachers are going to come from to cover classes at PP level. Even if we reach the full 1000 alloted for, it's not near enough. Am I wrong?
Lillyfae wrote: » It definitely wouldn't be necessary to have one per school. Once the job is done then it would just require ongoing inspection. 1 per cachement area would be enough.
mirrorwall14 wrote: » I don’t think you are.
jimmytwotimes 2013 wrote: » Wud they want to avoid a person mixing thro different schools and increasing their contacts? This person would be a teacher and wud be needed to teach their classes?
Lillyfae wrote: » A facility planner, who has a background in health and safety, occupational health etc etc. Hopefully not another teacher who's done a course anyway.
Lillyfae wrote: » Is it known how many teachers in the whole country are looking for work? How many qualified this year for example?
Lillyfae wrote: » I see secondary schools as less of a problem. Children are older so can be made cognizant of the risks. It's possible to leave them unattended for half an hour. They can work independently and can use technology for support. The secondary schools themselves have more funding, are larger, and are generally in better nick than primary schools..