Return to Education

[The Ham]

Please would you both kindly state or provide a link to give evidence to back up your claims that the government is listening to the teaching unions in any meaningful way?

As has been pointed out many times, the government largely ignores the teaching unions. Do either of you think the government shut schools in January because of union pressure?

I wasn't suggesting the the government was listening to the unions, I was suggesting that if the unions wanted to protect their members the most then a good way to do that was the suggestion that I made.

It could be a way of limiting the impact of opening of schools without causing working parents too much of an issue (although there would still be some for whom it would be still be an issue if they didn't have access to other wrap around care however it would be much reduced).

 

[RuralRambler]

Toning down Uni tuition fees might be reasonable. So that'll never happen.

I think reducing the stupidly high interest rates on student loans (or waiving interest completely) would be a good start to "compensate" for the awful uni experience at the moment.

Current uni students will be paying higher tax/NIC to pay for covid, plus workplace pensions, plus student loan repayments. Charging a ridiculously high interest rate on their average £45k of student loan debt is just taking the mickey.

 

[PHILIPE]

We have a situation where Boris, Mutt and Baby Face (Gavin) are all mentioning different possibilities. In addition to them there are a host of "experts" throwing in their opinions regarding the schools starting back.

 

[sjpowermac]

I wasn't suggesting the the government was listening to the unions, I was suggesting that if the unions wanted to protect their members the most then a good way to do that was the suggestion that I made.

It could be a way of limiting the impact of opening of schools without causing working parents too much of an issue (although there would still be some for whom it would be still be an issue if they didn't have access to other wrap around care however it would be much reduced).

I don’t have any real take on nursery or primary schools.

To an outsider though the ‘wrap around care’ option that you are proposing seems somewhat bizarre, completely outside of the remit of unions to propose such a thing and is highly unlikely to happen.

Thank you though for clarifying about the government and unions.

 

[Nicholas Lewis]

We have a situation where Boris, Mutt and Baby Face (Gavin) are all mentioning different possibilities. I addition to them there are a host of "experts" throwing in their opinions regarding the schools starting back.

Schools were safe a couple of weeks back now it looks like they are there main target to keep transmission down. Its clear this has always been the issue but because the govt didn't want to be seen to looking foolish last autumn it allowed education to carry on and seed vast transmission resulting in lockdown and destruction of vast amounts of the economy. The govt have catastrophically failed to get prepared for this situation they could have bought in numerous counter measure like reduced class sizes, reduced days in school more assistance for home learning but they did nothing and have left a mess.

 

[158756]

I think reducing the stupidly high interest rates on student loans (or waiving interest completely) would be a good start to "compensate" for the awful uni experience at the moment.

Current uni students will be paying higher tax/NIC to pay for covid, plus workplace pensions, plus student loan repayments. Charging a ridiculously high interest rate on their average £45k of student loan debt is just taking the mickey.

The problem with reducing tuition fees or the interest rate is that under the current repayment system it would only benefit higher earners. If you borrowed £45k, if the rate was cut to say 2%, your earnings would have to average about £55k to see any benefit at all, and you'd only see that in nearly 30 years time. Most students will never pay £45k, so the interest is irrelevant.

 

[bramling]

Random thought (which might well be totally nuts): Should the the government be thinking about financial compensation to pupils for the level of disruption to education that they're going through.? Payable to pupils (not parents) as a trust fund available to them on their 18th birthday.

Not sure what that would really achieve to be honest. If I were one of the affected cohort, I’d rather have my proper education and development which will serve for life rather than a sum of money. I’d suggest that compensation devalues the loss they have suffered which can’t really be made up with a monetary sum.

 

[The Ham]

To an outsider though the ‘wrap around care’ option that you are proposing seems somewhat bizarre, completely outside of the remit of unions to propose such a thing and is highly unlikely to happen.

I'll give you an example, there's the children one in nursery (bubble 1) one in infant school (bubble 2) and one in junior school (bubble 3) they all live together so it has little difference to the risk of cross contamination.

However they then go to a childminder with 7 other children all from different bubbles. Now if one of those first three get Covid-19 there's a risk that it could shut down 10 different school bubbles. Depending on parents working patterns it could be that there's a risk 20 children being looked after by a childminder over the course of the week, even though the numbers on any given day are half that.

Now if the reason that those children are in wrap around care is because the parents aren't working at home not only is that the kids as a vector of infection but any of the people that they work with or anyone that they deal with at work.

That's then potentially a lot more routes of infection into any given classroom than is the case presently, where there's often just 20 kids in a bubble.

If you have too much wrap around care (i.e. an area of high numbers of both parents working) then I suspect that the benefits of reduced contact between classes in school almost gets wiped out.

 

[Richard Scott]

I'll give you an example, there's the children one in nursery (bubble 1) one in infant school (bubble 2) and one in junior school (bubble 3) they all live together so it has little difference to the risk of cross contamination.

However they then go to a childminder with 7 other children all from different bubbles. Now if one of those first three get Covid-19 there's a risk that it could shut down 10 different school bubbles. Depending on parents working patterns it could be that there's a risk 20 children being looked after by a childminder over the course of the week, even though the numbers on any given day are half that.

Now if the reason that those children are in wrap around care is because the parents aren't working at home not only is that the kids as a vector of infection but any of the people that they work with or anyone that they deal with at work.

That's then potentially a lot more routes of infection into any given classroom than is the case presently, where there's often just 20 kids in a bubble.

If you have too much wrap around care (i.e. an area of high numbers of both parents working) then I suspect that the benefits of reduced contact between classes in school almost gets wiped out.

Rather than examples can we have some facts, please? I'm coming to conclusion education is the latest scapegoat, I'm sure there have been cases of transmission in schools but they've been closed for weeks now and transmission was still high 4/5 weeks after.

 

[Yew]

I'm coming to conclusion education is the latest scapegoat,

The good news is that they're running out of things to scapegoat, so might have to finally admit that the idea of controlling a virus is insane.

 

[Nicholas Lewis]

The good news is that they're running out of things to scapegoat, so might have to finally admit that the idea of controlling a virus is insane.

Hancock certainly doesn't believe it after saying on Sky

“We are a long, long, long way off lifting lockdown restrictions”.

or that schools are our priority but if you ask me when they can go back I wont tell you so teh hapless Williamson has got no hope unless the CRG and others bring pressure to bare.

 

[The Ham]

Rather than examples can we have some facts, please? I'm coming to conclusion education is the latest scapegoat, I'm sure there have been cases of transmission in schools but they've been closed for weeks now and transmission was still high 4/5 weeks after.

The number of cases peaked on the 4th January at 430,000 cases in the 7 days prior to that and had been falling since with 224,000 cases in the 7 days prior to the 23rd January.

Whilst that quite a drop this is still much higher than the 160,000 7 day total seen at the start of the November lockdown (when schools and wrap around care were open also before there was significant numbers of of the new versions of the virus).

The issue is that it takes time for community cases to fall, as the higher the number of cases the higher the chance that the few people you interact with will have the virus. That means that restrictions are needed to help minimise the number of people that we interact with, to keep the R value low (so we have a shrinking number of cases rather than rising numbers).

By suggesting an option which allowed schools to reopen but kept wrap around care closed in theory we could look at reopening the schools sooner than we would otherwise would be able to, as by reopening schools it would increase the number of cases.

It should also be noted that although schools are "closed" there's still a LOT of people sending their kids in (and they have the right to do so as to are key workers), typically about 30% - 50%, which means that the impact of them being "closed" is less pronounced than would be the case if they were fully closed.

 

[londonteacher]

I think schools will reopen partially around the time the stay at home order is lifted, so around the second week of March. It may be that each pupil only goes to school for one or two days per week to start off with, with full reopening not until after Easter.

Schools will not open like that. If anything it will be a weekly rota due to how school bubbles work and the need to protect bubbles from mixing.

 

[Yew]

the need to protect bubbles from mixing.

If the vulnerable are vaccinated, there won't be a need...

 

[londonteacher]

If the vulnerable are vaccinated, there won't be a need...

That protects the vulnerables that's great for them. However, for other people the risk of transmission is still there and that is why bubbles are in place. Approximately 32 people mixing on a daily basis with no possible social distancing is so much safer with bubbles in place as it reduces the transmission.

I can see that schools will reopen fully, which as a teacher I want, and bubbles will remain as year groups or classes like they are where I work.

 

[Yew]

That protects the vulnerables that's great for them. However, for other people the risk of transmission is still there and that is why bubbles are in place. Approximately 32 people mixing on a daily basis with no possible social distancing is so much safer with bubbles in place as it reduces the transmission.

I can see that schools will reopen fully, which as a teacher I want, and bubbles will remain as year groups or classes like they are where I work.

Those who are not vulnerable do not need protecting.

 

[londonteacher]

Those who are not vulnerable do not need protecting.

Yes they do. There is still a risk.

Bubbles will remain in schools as I said for the foreseeable future as they have no impact on the children learning but reduce the risk of transmission.

 

[takno]

That protects the vulnerables that's great for them. However, for other people the risk of transmission is still there and that is why bubbles are in place. Approximately 32 people mixing on a daily basis with no possible social distancing is so much safer with bubbles in place as it reduces the transmission.

I can see that schools will reopen fully, which as a teacher I want, and bubbles will remain as year groups or classes like they are where I work.

From speaking to other teachers I'd say the bubbles are in place for the year now - there's just no point in changing it halfway through. One head I'm aware of is so pleased with the way it's working out that they're investigating doing a lot of the class/teacher assignments the same way next year. Obviously that just relates to the timetabling aspects - everybody will be relatively pleased to be able to shut the windows and let the kids mix at break times.

 

[RomeoCharlie71]

Yes they do. There is still a risk.

Bubbles will remain in schools as I said for the foreseeable future as they have no impact on the children learning but reduce the risk of transmission.

Well, they do have an impact on the children's education especially if the whole year group has to self-isolate because of one positive case.

IMO the close contacts of the child who tested positive should be identified and the rest of the year group carry on as normal - which is what happens in my local secondary schools.

 

[Yew]

Yes they do. There is still a risk.

Bubbles will remain in schools as I said for the foreseeable future as they have no impact on the children learning but reduce the risk of transmission.

That's insane, how much of our lives are we going to let them take in a delusional quest to 'control' a virus, there are always risks; and to children and most staff, there is most likely more risk from crossing the roads on the way to school than from a respiratory virus.

 

[londonteacher]

Well, they do have an impact on the children's education especially if the whole year group has to self-isolate because of one positive case.

IMO the close contacts of the child who tested positive should be identified and the rest of the year group carry on as normal - which is what happens in my local secondary schools.

That's what is happening across all schools from January.

That's insane, how much of our lives are we going to let them take in a delusional quest to 'control' a virus, there are always risks; and to children and most staff, there is most likely more risk from crossing the roads on the way to school than from a respiratory virus.

But this isn't taking away anything from our lives? Have you experienced class/year bubbles?

I do as part of my job. They allow for us to teach normally and live a normal life in school.

Once more people are vaccinated, so most likely from September, they most likely will not be needed at all in schools.

 

[Yew]

That's what is happening across all schools from January.


But this isn't taking away anything from our lives? Have you experienced class/year bubbles?

I do as part of my job. They allow for us to teach normally and live a normal life in school.

Once more people are vaccinated, so most likely from September, they most likely will not be needed at all in schools.

It isn't needed now. That's the point.

Perhaps it is not taking much from the cold numerical aspect of teaching, but it takes much in the way of social development from those who are being taught; meeting new people from other classes and other years, engaging in after school clubs with those who share the same interests as you, rather than the same register. All of these are fundamental aspects of growing up, that we cannot forfeit for any longer.

 

[Richard Scott]

It isn't needed now. That's the point.

Perhaps it is not taking much from the cold numerical aspect of teaching, but it takes much in the way of social development from those who are being taught; meeting new people from other classes and other years, engaging in after school clubs with those who share the same interests as you, rather than the same register. All of these are fundamental aspects of growing up, that we cannot forfeit for any longer.

Agreed it's the social aspect that goes. Many clubs are not allowed to run.

 

[farleigh]

Teaching in bubbles is not teaching normally. It has a huge number of detrimental effects on staff and students

 

[londonteacher]

It isn't needed now. That's the point.

Perhaps it is not taking much from the cold numerical aspect of teaching, but it takes much in the way of social development from those who are being taught; meeting new people from other classes and other years, engaging in after school clubs with those who share the same interests as you, rather than the same register. All of these are fundamental aspects of growing up, that we cannot forfeit for any longer.

It's not that I don't agree with you. Yes children are missing out on those things and they are important. But ultimately the risk is there, and I know not everyone wants to believe it, but in my class alone there were 4 positive cases within a month. Bubbles have meant that the transmission was low across the school. They do have a place temporarily in our schools.

Teaching in bubbles is not teaching normally. It has a huge number of detrimental effects on staff and students

The 'teaching' can be normal and I know in my class I have not done anything different this year compared to previous years of teaching. The children are still having the same opportunities in my classroom. But I can't speak for all classrooms.

The normal social aspects mixing across year groups/classes are definitely missing but that is purely temporary and hopefully will be back soon.

 

[farleigh]

The 'teaching' can be normal and I know in my class I have not done anything different this year compared to previous years of teaching. The children are still having the same opportunities in my classroom. But I can't speak for all classrooms.

The normal social aspects mixing across year groups/classes are definitely missing but that is purely temporary and hopefully will be back soon.

I think the teaching can be normal but the experience for students is severely compromised under 'bubble' conditions. I also hope that normal conditions will return soon.

 

[bramling]

The good news is that they're running out of things to scapegoat, so might have to finally admit that the idea of controlling a virus is insane.

If only that were true! There’s always the default option of blaming it on people not following “the rules”.

I’d like to know what these “rules” actually are. We have laws and guidance, one mandatory the other advisory.

 

[Bantamzen]

That protects the vulnerables that's great for them. However, for other people the risk of transmission is still there and that is why bubbles are in place. Approximately 32 people mixing on a daily basis with no possible social distancing is so much safer with bubbles in place as it reduces the transmission.

I can see that schools will reopen fully, which as a teacher I want, and bubbles will remain as year groups or classes like they are where I work.

I'm not sure I understand your logic here. If we protect the vulnerable through vaccination, massively reducing their risk of being seriously ill, hospitalised or even dying, then where's the "risk" for those not likely to become seriously ill? If they are not likely to kill granny any more, what is this risk? Is it just the risk of being made to feel guilty by adults for simply being a kid because the government & media told them to?

Yes they do. There is still a risk.

Bubbles will remain in schools as I said for the foreseeable future as they have no impact on the children learning but reduce the risk of transmission.

Are you sure that treating kids like risk factors, farming them off into little bubbles isolated from their peers beyond will have no impact? I'm going to say that it is a far bigger risk to their long term mental health than this risk of transmission you seem to be focused on.

 

[Mojo]

Despite the damage this is doing to children and staff, the Prime Minister has today announced that schools will not be returning until 8th March, at the earliest.

 

[Solent&Wessex]

Despite the damage this is doing to children and staff, the Prime Minister has today announced that schools will not be returning until 8th March, at the earliest.

Which is only 3 weeks before they break up for Easter.