nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Child Item

How will schools be able to go back in September?

shoppergal

Just wondering if anyone can give any insight into how schools could safely re-open in September?

Everyone I'm talking to is saying they won't be back until September but in my head I'm wondering how they'll re-open even in September? The virus will still be there with a vaccine still months away at that stage.

Find more posts tagged with

schools

rte news

covid

Quick Links

Comments

Lillyfae

khalessi wrote: »

....

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

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.

[Deleted User]

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

[Deleted User]

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

[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.

[Deleted User]

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

downthemiddle

[Deleted User] wrote: »

I have kids in school in this country.

Clearly they don’t have any additional needs.

[Deleted User]

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?

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?".

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?

caveat emptor

Deleted User wrote: »

Don’t know does this say what you think it does - summary under 10 proven lower risk based on Korean study. When virus is low in community little risk in going to schools, as it increases measures should be increased up to and including school closures

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.

[Deleted User]

caveat emptor wrote: »

Caveat: this could be a deep fake. I was working on my Fauci voice (sarcasm)
Everyone sending a kid back should watch it.
Educators too.
I'm sure the department know it all.

https://twitter.com/khanacademy/status/1288483417512968192?s=20

Don’t know does this say what you think it does - summary under 10 proven lower risk based on Korean study. When virus is low in community little risk in going to schools, as it increases measures should be increased up to and including school closures

khalessi

Lillyfae wrote: »

Aren’t I entitled to an opinion? Aren’t we all? Isn’t it better at this point to be solution focused rather than problem focused?

Do you think the schools are well run?

Well given so far your opinon over the last 48 hours has involved slagging off teachers qualifications and apologising to secoondary school teachers and then transfering that opinon to primary school teachers. Then adivising someone today looking for advice not to contact a principal, when they should as the teachers pointed out, and then again implying people (parents BOM principals) would deliberately loosely follow guidelines so they dont have to open schools I would think not you are not.

I think you have no knowledge of the Irish Education system. You live in a different country, go annoy the teachers there with your amazing knowledge and you have very litte applicable knowledge to the system here apart from slagging off the education system and teachers.

At least the people who post here apart from yourself are either parents or educators and though I might agree or disagree with them, they have more knowlege of the education system then you do and have a stake in it succeeding.

I rather the solutions came from someone actually involved in the sector whether parent or educator as least they have some idea of what education in Ireland is about.

And regarding whether schools are well run, for the most part yes on a day to day basis very well run, but sitting in the Netherlands you cannot experience that. Our PISA results would indicate this and other studies.

[Deleted User]

downthemiddle wrote: »

You still haven’t addressed the issue of discrimination against children with additional needs. Do you think it is right that schools have been asked to plan to cut resources for the most vulnerable in our school communities?

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?

caveat emptor

Caveat: this could be a deep fake. I was working on my Fauci voice (sarcasm)
Everyone sending a kid back should watch it.
Educators too.
I'm sure the department know it all.

https://twitter.com/khanacademy/status/1288483417512968192?s=20

downthemiddle

[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

You still haven’t addressed the issue of discrimination against children with additional needs. Do you think it is right that schools have been asked to plan to cut resources for the most vulnerable in our school communities?

Smacruairi

[Deleted User] wrote: »

I said it’s a choice, not what believe what should happen. Some countries have set it at 13 under GDPR, and if we judged the benefits of rolling the app on to 13 to 15 year olds outweighed the risks of lowering the digital age of consent we could. We could also implement a system to allow parents to give digital consent under emergency powers. GDPR does not trump public health.

What does trump public health?

Boggles

combat14 wrote: »

maybe it would work alot of teachers I kno in dubai for example are extremely reluctant to come back here due to low pay / pay disparity

not sure if "usual" teachers would be happy if others getting 20000 euro bump

teacher numbers is only one aspect of the health and safety issues of this "plan"

A lot of nurses came back to answer the call. A lot of them are unemployed now.

combat14

Alrigghtythen wrote: »

There loads of qualified teachers working in other jobs due to the lack of permanent teaching jobs. We could offer them an incentive of 20000 on top of the usual teachers wages to return.

maybe it would work alot of teachers I kno in dubai for example are extremely reluctant to come back here due to low pay / pay disparity

not sure if "usual" teachers would be happy if others getting 20000 euro bump

teacher numbers is only one aspect of the health and safety issues of this "plan"

downthemiddle

Lillyfae wrote: »

Aren’t I entitled to an opinion? Aren’t we all? Isn’t it better at this point to be solution focused rather than problem focused?

Do you think the schools are well run?

Despite the massive underfunding and the disgraceful class sizes my experience would lead me to believe that the majority of schools are well run. Unlike you I have children in the Irish system and I have great faith in the teachers, the vast majority of whom I believe to do a good job.

thenetherrealm

Alrigghtythen wrote: »

There loads of qualified teachers working in other jobs due to the lack of permanent teaching jobs. We could offer them an incentive of 20000 on top of the usual teachers wages to return.

Offer them 20,000 extra to return, and every teacher that qualified post 2011 will walk away without a second thought (myself included). We have fought for years for pay equalisation, yet because people are returning they should be given 20,000 extra? Can I leave for a few weeks and then return, for 150% of my current salary?

Boggles

Alrigghtythen wrote: »

There loads of qualified teachers working in other jobs due to the lack of permanent teaching jobs.

Really, how many? And how many are willing to work in unsafe conditions during a once in a lifetime pandemic?

Alrigghtythen wrote: »

We could offer them an incentive of 20000 on top of the usual teachers wages to return.

We could offer them a car and a new house, but the department have offered them fúck all, which is all that matters.

Also after the don the green jersey recruitment drive for the hospitals and all those poor sods were left high and dry, I don't think people will be fooled by that again and leave their solid employment.

[Deleted User]

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

Alrigghtythen

Boggles wrote: »

Nobody knows really. Norma reckons there is piles out there willing to sacrifice themselves for her "death plan". :pac:

Nearly 50,000 sub days were filled by retired primary teachers last year.

The chickens are coming home to roost.

There loads of qualified teachers working in other jobs due to the lack of permanent teaching jobs. We could offer them an incentive of 20000 on top of the usual teachers wages to return.

Lillyfae

downthemiddle wrote: »

I thought you would have the answer. You have constantly given your opinion on how poorly schools are run and offered your solutions. I’m amazed that we have finally found of school life that is beyond your level of expertise.

Aren’t I entitled to an opinion? Aren’t we all? Isn’t it better at this point to be solution focused rather than problem focused?

Do you think the schools are well run?

Boggles

Deleted User wrote: »

Where are we getting a large amount of extra teachers for September?

Nobody knows really. Norma reckons there is piles out there willing to sacrifice themselves for her "death plan". :pac:

Nearly 50,000 sub days were filled by retired primary teachers last year.

The chickens are coming home to roost.

[Deleted User]

Smacruairi wrote: »

We could also reduce class sizes, hire more teachers, spread out the school day. All easier just need proper investment and planning and don't require legislative changes. But that doesn't suit most.

Where are we getting a large amount of extra teachers for September?

Boggles

jrosen wrote: »

I said encourage not tell. We can then encourage all over the age of 16 to download the app then seeing as there is the age restriction.

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.

downthemiddle

Lillyfae wrote: »

Of course it's not acceptable, but what's your alternative? Only educate the most vulnerable, or educate everyone to the best possible standard under the current circumstances for as long as is necessary??

I thought you would have the answer. You have constantly given your opinion on how poorly schools are run and offered your solutions. I’m amazed that we have finally found of school life that is beyond your level of expertise.

[Deleted User]

khalessi wrote: »

Well all legal requirements can be changed but it takes time and certain protocols have to be followed, as was pointed out to you. If it was just a case of going hey lets make it 13 they would have at the outset but obviously it it not.
We could legislate for 3 year olds to drive cars, a silly idea and not safe but it could be done.

I said it’s a choice, not what believe what should happen. Some countries have set it at 13 under GDPR, and if we judged the benefits of rolling the app on to 13 to 15 year olds outweighed the risks of lowering the digital age of consent we could. We could also implement a system to allow parents to give digital consent under emergency powers. GDPR does not trump public health.