• Our booking engine at tickets.railforums.co.uk (powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!

Return to Education

Status
Not open for further replies.

Richard Scott

Established Member
Joined
13 Dec 2018
Messages
3,701
The poster claimed that attendance would be hit by parents keeping their children at home. That didn’t happen.


Even if your figures are accurate, 88% v 95% is hardly the mass stay at home that was being predicted. In addition, the article doesn’t say that the drop in attendance was due to parents keeping their children at home because they were frightened to send them.
88% is appalling, I know this isn't spread each child so some will be nudging 100% whilst others are close to 0. But if it were every child that means they miss more than a day every fortnight, that's going to have a detrimental affect on their education. Anything less than 95% is frowned upon and even that number is a lower tolerance.
Agree not many were kept at home but some have been.
 
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

sjpowermac

Established Member
Joined
26 May 2018
Messages
1,989
88% is appalling, I know this isn't spread each child so some will be nudging 100% whilst others are close to 0. But if it were every child that means they miss more than a day every fortnight, that's going to have a detrimental affect on their education. Anything less than 95% is frowned upon and even that number is a lower tolerance.
Agree not many were kept at home but some have been.
Indeed it is appalling but it definitely isn’t the mass stay at home that some were predicting back in the summer.

In addition, we simply can’t tell if the 7% drop compared with normal times was due to parents with safety concerns or other factors, such as isolation at play.

Do you know of any more detailed analysis of the figures? The key one would be to look at unauthorised abscence.

I don’t want to start removing posts and sending messages to people, so can I remind everyone from this point to be respectful of each other and not be sarcastic, provocative or angry in your responses.
Any posts that don’t follow these forum rules will have to be deleted from the thread from now.
Thanks all.
For the avoidance of doubt, is it permitted to ask people if they still hold the same views as they did earlier in the year?

It’s a genuine question because my own views have changed and I’m happy to admit that I got some things wrong.

Back in April I was minded that reopening schools would not be safe, but I realise now that was complete nonsense and I’m more than happy to admit that, I now believe it was a huge mistake to close the schools.

I’ve also learned a great deal from some of the threads that has either changed my mind about a topic, or made me more understanding.

I think it’s regrettable that many seem to shrink from admitting they got something wrong...
 
Last edited:

Richard Scott

Established Member
Joined
13 Dec 2018
Messages
3,701
Indeed it is appalling but it definitely isn’t the mass stay at home that some were predicting back in the summer.

In addition, we simply can’t tell if the 7% drop compared with normal times was due to parents with safety concerns or other factors, such as isolation at play.

Do you know of any more detailed analysis of the figures? The key one would be to look at unauthorised abscence.
Afraid I don't know how the figures are currently calculated, my guess would be enforced isolation is not included so the 88% is actual attendance when virus figures are removed from equation so would look like a real reduction of 7% or so compared to previous years.
 

sjpowermac

Established Member
Joined
26 May 2018
Messages
1,989
Afraid I don't know how the figures are currently calculated, my guess would be enforced isolation is not included so the 88% is actual attendance when virus figures are removed from equation so would look like a real reduction of 7% or so compared to previous years.
I don’t think this is correct, as I understand abscence includes those isolating, but I am happy to be corrected on that:)
 

Richard Scott

Established Member
Joined
13 Dec 2018
Messages
3,701
I don’t think this is correct, as I understand abscence includes those isolating, but I am happy to be corrected on that:)
I do know local school do not count isolation in attendance figures as believe that's a government thing do expect all schools the same.
 

Cowley

Forum Staff
Staff Member
Global Moderator
Joined
15 Apr 2016
Messages
15,828
Location
Devon
For the avoidance of doubt, is it permitted to ask people if they still hold the same views as they did earlier in the year?

It’s a genuine question because my own views have changed and I’m happy to admit that I got some things wrong.

That’s absolutely fine as long as it isn’t done in a way that’s badgering/provocative etc.
Opinions can change sometimes.
 

sjpowermac

Established Member
Joined
26 May 2018
Messages
1,989
I do know local school do not count isolation in attendance figures as believe that's a government thing do expect all schools the same.
All ways round, without figures for unauthorised abscence, we can’t really say.

I’m very doubtful that 7% of students have been out of school for any length of time on the basis of their parents being frightened of them catching the virus. All the secondary schools I know of have attendance officers who would be all over that.
 

FLIRTfan18

Member
Joined
11 Mar 2020
Messages
77
Location
Wolverhampton
Indeed it is appalling but it definitely isn’t the mass stay at home that some were predicting back in the summer.

In addition, we simply can’t tell if the 7% drop compared with normal times was due to parents with safety concerns or other factors, such as isolation at play.

Do you know of any more detailed analysis of the figures? The key one would be to look at unauthorised abscence.


For the avoidance of doubt, is it permitted to ask people if they still hold the same views as they did earlier in the year?

It’s a genuine question because my own views have changed and I’m happy to admit that I got some things wrong.

Back in April I was minded that reopening schools would not be safe, but I realise now that was complete nonsense and I’m more than happy to admit that, I now believe it was a huge mistake to close the schools.

I’ve also learned a great deal from some of the threads that has either changed my mind about a topic, or made me more understanding.

I think it’s regrettable that many seem to shrink from admitting they got something wrong...
I don't think it was a mistake to close schools in March, because there are so many things that weren't in place at the time; sanitiser, PPE availability, track and trace systems, one way systems and all the other adaptions to keep bubbles seperate etc... Also we have to take into account that far less was known about how it transmits and how many people had it at the time. We've come a long way. I think it would have been reasonable for all years to be back for at least some time before the summer holidays to take advantage of the better weather. Perhaps as early as May half term. Hindsight is a wonderful thing though and they were right to be cautious (although was opening in September cautious? I don't think so)
 

yorkie

Forum Staff
Staff Member
Administrator
Joined
6 Jun 2005
Messages
67,986
Location
Yorkshire
Indeed it is appalling but it definitely isn’t the mass stay at home that some were predicting back in the summer.

In addition, we simply can’t tell if the 7% drop compared with normal times was due to parents with safety concerns or other factors, such as isolation at play.

Do you know of any more detailed analysis of the figures? The key one would be to look at unauthorised abscence.


For the avoidance of doubt, is it permitted to ask people if they still hold the same views as they did earlier in the year?

It’s a genuine question because my own views have changed and I’m happy to admit that I got some things wrong.

Back in April I was minded that reopening schools would not be safe, but I realise now that was complete nonsense and I’m more than happy to admit that, I now believe it was a huge mistake to close the schools.

I’ve also learned a great deal from some of the threads that has either changed my mind about a topic, or made me more understanding.

I think it’s regrettable that many seem to shrink from admitting they got something wrong...
This is a fantastic post, spot on in every respect.

(I say this, not as some uninformed random person, but as someone who has experience of working in education (and the NHS, though that's not relevant here), including directly running extracurricular activities as well as leading on the teaching of lessons for young people, and has spent an hour on the phone today speaking to parents)
 

Richard Scott

Established Member
Joined
13 Dec 2018
Messages
3,701
All ways round, without figures for unauthorised abscence, we can’t really say.

I’m very doubtful that 7% of students have been out of school for any length of time on the basis of their parents being frightened of them catching the virus. All the secondary schools I know of have attendance officers who would be all over that.
Afraid they can't, can guarantee if it's virus related then it's authorised. Usually it'll be due to parent claiming someone in household is vulnerable.
 

yorkie

Forum Staff
Staff Member
Administrator
Joined
6 Jun 2005
Messages
67,986
Location
Yorkshire
I do know local school do not count isolation in attendance figures as believe that's a government thing do expect all schools the same.
If there is any doubt as to what is or isn't counted, please post what you think the exact position is, and I can ask an attendance officer for clarification.
All ways round, without figures for unauthorised abscence, we can’t really say.

I’m very doubtful that 7% of students have been out of school for any length of time on the basis of their parents being frightened of them catching the virus. All the secondary schools I know of have attendance officers who would be all over that.
Agreed; I am only aware of a very small number of parents who are keeping children away for fear of them catching the virus, and as the year has gone on even those parents are now sending the kids to school!

I've seen emails from parents saying how keen they are for their children to not miss out on school, for example questioning the isolation period (in a constructive way, I must stress) as they felt it should have ended a day earlier than originally calculated and they were keen to get the child back in to school ASAP and the child didn't want to miss out.

I also suspect that if any kids have been kept off this week it would have been far more likely due to fear of being contacted traced and NOT due to a fear of them catching the virus (i.e. a desire to preserve their freedom over the Christmas break).
 

Richard Scott

Established Member
Joined
13 Dec 2018
Messages
3,701
If there is any doubt as to what is or isn't counted, please post what you think the exact position is, and I can ask an attendance officer for clarification.
I know in our local school a virus related absence is considered authorised irrespective of time, if parent says due to someone being vulnerable then it's no questions asked.
 

sjpowermac

Established Member
Joined
26 May 2018
Messages
1,989
Maybe they read the news and believed that not to be the case. Unless you have different figures to the media, I would say that 88% on school return isn't that high.




Only a week after that report, attendance figures dipped a bit and cases of pupils being sent home were starting to rise.




Then in November it fell to only 78% attendance overall, with warnings it would worsen.




Overall it improved into this month but some regions were hit hard with some only reaching 77%.
Afraid they can't, can guarantee if it's virus related then it's authorised. Usually it'll be due to parent claiming someone in household is vulnerable.

If there is any doubt as to what is or isn't counted, please post what you think the exact position is, and I can ask an attendance officer for clarification.

Agreed; I am only aware of a very small number of parents who are keeping children away for fear of them catching the virus, and as the year has gone on even those parents are now sending the kids to school!

I've seen emails from parents saying how keen they are for their children to not miss out on school, for example questioning the isolation period (in a constructive way, I must stress) as they felt it should have ended a day earlier than originally calculated and they were keen to get the child back in to school ASAP and the child didn't want to miss out.

I also suspect that if any kids have been kept off this week it would have been far more likely due to fear of being contacted traced and NOT due to a fear of them catching the virus (i.e. a desire to preserve their freedom over the Christmas break).
X marks the spot! It has been a long term and I completely forgot to mention the X in registers to denote that a student is away due to the virus. The conditions for using the X are basically that if a student were to attend they would be breaking the virus legislation, it certainly doesn’t cover ‘my parents are too scared to send me’!


The X is applied in my school by the attendance officer, so as an ordinary Joe in the classroom I don’t deal with this.

I’ve no idea what the figures are that the BBC quoted and to be blunt, I’m not particularly interested either, I think the BBC become a ‘click bait’ website many years ago.

As to the most likely reason for the drop in attendance from 95% to 88% then I’m sure that the quarantine rules that applied at the time will have had an effect. Many families do take holidays in the summer and at least some will have been caught out by the rapidly switching laws at the time...

I don't think it was a mistake to close schools in March, because there are so many things that weren't in place at the time; sanitiser, PPE availability, track and trace systems, one way systems and all the other adaptions to keep bubbles seperate etc... Also we have to take into account that far less was known about how it transmits and how many people had it at the time. We've come a long way. I think it would have been reasonable for all years to be back for at least some time before the summer holidays to take advantage of the better weather. Perhaps as early as May half term. Hindsight is a wonderful thing though and they were right to be cautious (although was opening in September cautious? I don't think so)
I hear what you are saying but the measures put in place by secondary schools do very little other than to be a detriment to both students and teachers.

As an example, as far as I’m aware, the rule for social distancing is still 2 metres or 1 metre plus, with a mask as mitigation. There’s no way that can ever work on a busy school corridor or lunch area. Compare and contrast with the railway industry and the endless announcements about using ‘window seats only so that others can pass through the train safely’.

I can’t think of a single thing that schools have been forced to put in place that does anything to significantly reduce transmission of the virus. We could have stayed open throughout, operated as normal, and I think the result would have been much the same.
 
Last edited:

Jamesrob637

Established Member
Joined
12 Aug 2016
Messages
5,271
Many schools are not sending everybody back on the 4th. Some may not send some pupils back until mid-January (those who don't have critical exams this academic year)
 

yorkie

Forum Staff
Staff Member
Administrator
Joined
6 Jun 2005
Messages
67,986
Location
Yorkshire
OK just a gentle reminder that if you are referring to a news report, we do ask that you include a link to the source, a quote from the source, as well as a comment of your own please. Thanks :)
 

sjpowermac

Established Member
Joined
26 May 2018
Messages
1,989
@yorkie Unless I’ve missed something, it looks like schools will be shut in Tier 4 areas.

Here is the section in the Statutory Instrument regarding education:
Exception 2: work, voluntary services, education and training etc
(5) Exception 2 is that it is reasonably necessary for P to leave or be outside P’s home—
(a) for the purposes of work or to provide voluntary or charitable services, where it is not reasonably possible for P to work, or to provide those services, from home;
(b) for a purpose of the type specified in paragraph 6(3) of this Schedule;
(c) to provide care or assistance, including relevant personal care within the meaning of paragraph 7(3B) of Schedule 4 to the Safeguarding Vulnerable Groups Act 2006(a), to a vulnerable person;
(d) to provide emergency assistance to any person;
(e) to fulfil a legal obligation or to participate in legal proceedings;
(f) to access critical public services, including—
(i) socialservices;
(ii) servicesprovidedbytheDepartmentforWorkandPensions;
(iii) services provided to victims (including victims of crime);
(iv) asylumandimmigrationservicesandinterviews;
(g) to access services provided by voluntary or charitable services, including food banks.
No mention there of schools.
 

hwl

Established Member
Joined
5 Feb 2012
Messages
7,408
Some interesting analysis re new strain and transmission in under 18s in this new BBC article:

If so it looks like a major reassessment will be on the way including vaccination in the under 18s (most probably in the over 12 group) but nothing licensed below 16 yet .


Scientists are urgently investigating hints the new variant of coronavirus spreads more easily in children.
If proven, this could account for "a significant proportion" of the increase in transmission, they say.
The claim comes from members of the government's New and Emerging Respiratory Virus Threats advisory group (Nervtag).
On Monday, Boris Johnson said he wanted to open schools in January "if we possibly can".
There are no suggestions the new form of the virus is a greater threat to children's health.

Children almost universally shrug off the virus, but the variant could alter the role they, and schools, play in spreading the virus.
Earlier strains of coronavirus found it harder to infect children than adults.
One explanation is children have fewer of the doorways (the ACE2 receptor) the virus uses to enter our body's cells.
A recent study of infections in schools in England found that levels of the virus in school-age children reflected levels in the local community, suggesting that closing schools would only have a temporary effect.

Lightning speed​

Prof Wendy Barclay, from Nervtag and Imperial College London, said the mutations to the virus appeared to be making it easier to walk through the doorways that were there.
She said this could be putting children on a "more level playing field" with adults as the virus was "less inhibited" in children.
Prof Barclay said: "Therefore children are equally susceptible, perhaps, to this virus as adults, and therefore given their mixing patterns, you would expect to see more children being infected."
Work to understand the new variant is taking place at lightning speed and there is still much uncertainty.
It is now thought the new variant spreads 50% to 70% faster than other forms of the virus.
Early analysis of how and where it is spreading have also given "hints that it has a higher propensity to infect children", according to Prof Neil Ferguson from the MRC Centre for Global Infectious Disease Analysis, who also sits on Nervtag.
He stressed the link was still being investigated and was not yet proven.
"If it were true, then this might explain a significant proportion, maybe even the majority, of the transmission increase seen," he added.
But Prof Julian Hiscox, chair in infection and global health, from the University of Liverpool, told the BBC there wasn't any evidence "at the moment" that the new variant is able to infect kids more efficiently.
He said this would be looked at closely by scientists over Christmas.

'Retain control'​

The data are continuing to be analysed, but it is thought the variant continued spreading even during the lockdown in November.
The R number - the average number of people each infected person passes the virus onto - for this variant during the tight restrictions has been estimated at 1.2, which meant cases were increasing.
At the same time the R number was 0.8 for the other forms of the virus during lockdown and they were in decline.


Prof Ferguson said he expected the number of infections to fall as schools closed and people hunkered down for Christmas.
He added: "The real question then is - how much are we able to relax measures in the new year, and still retain control?"
Prime Minister Boris Johnson said: "We want, if we possibly can, to get schools back in a staggered way at the beginning of January, in the way that we have set out.
"But obviously the common sensical thing to do is to follow the path of the epidemic and, as we showed last Saturday, to keep things under constant review."
 

yorkie

Forum Staff
Staff Member
Administrator
Joined
6 Jun 2005
Messages
67,986
Location
Yorkshire
@yorkie Unless I’ve missed something, it looks like schools will be shut in Tier 4 areas.

Here is the section in the Statutory Instrument regarding education:

No mention there of schools.
Clarification can be found here:

https://www.gov.uk/guidance/tier-4-stay-at-home
Schools and colleges will remain open during term time in Tier 4 areas. The government will continue to prioritise the wellbeing and long-term futures of our young people. It remains very important for children and young people to attend, to support their wellbeing and education and help working parents and guardians. Senior clinicians still advise that school is the best place for children to be, and so they should continue to go to school during term time.

The hysterical brigade will, no doubt, renew their efforts to close schools. Their demands should be resisted.
 

Mag_seven

Forum Staff
Staff Member
Global Moderator
Joined
1 Sep 2014
Messages
10,042
Location
here to eternity
The hysterical brigade will, no doubt, renew their efforts to close schools. Their demands should be resisted.

Just listening to the radio (LBC) just now where the discussion topic is "Should schools stay closed for January......"
 

RomeoCharlie71

Established Member
Joined
18 Sep 2017
Messages
1,729
Location
Scotland
Schools are already going back later than planned, and online (for at least a week) in Scotland, after Christmas - so don't be shocked if Bozza and his cronies follow suit.

Just listening to the radio (LBC) just now where the discussion topic is "Should schools stay closed for January"......
Isn't LBC quite Tory biased? Or at least used to be?
 

NorthOxonian

Established Member
Associate Staff
Buses & Coaches
Joined
5 Jul 2018
Messages
1,490
Location
Oxford/Newcastle
Schools are already going back later than planned, and online (for at least a week) in Scotland, after Christmas - so don't be shocked if Bozza and his cronies follow suit.


Isn't LBC quite Tory biased? Or at least used to be?
It depends massively on the presenter - there are quite a few Tories but some who are much more left leaning. The same also applies to views on lockdowns and the virus - the different presenters all have very different views.
 

MarlowDonkey

Member
Joined
4 Apr 2013
Messages
1,104
Just listening to the radio (LBC) just now where the discussion topic is "Should schools stay closed for January"......

What's the story on universities? There had been a threat earlier in the year that students could be forced to spend Christmas in their halls of residence. The absence of stories about this suggests they were allowed home. But will they be allowed back? That's in the context of some medical officers demanding that those travelling from tier 4 areas to tier 2 be put into quarantine for two weeks.
 

Mojo

Forum Staff
Staff Member
Administrator
Joined
7 Aug 2005
Messages
20,416
Location
0035
“...according to Prof Neil Ferguson from the MRC Centre for Global Infectious Disease Analysis, who also sits on Nervtag.”

WHY are we still listening to this lunatic? He has got pretty much everything wrong so far..!

Also, on 6th May it was stated by the PM’s spokesman when asked if Ferguson will remain on Nervtag:

“Nervtag is part of Sage, so the answer is no, Professor Ferguson will no longer attend, participate or contribute to SAGE meetings.”
 

RomeoCharlie71

Established Member
Joined
18 Sep 2017
Messages
1,729
Location
Scotland
I think there is a staggered return for university students planned? It's about a 5 week window, in Scotland at least.
 

sjpowermac

Established Member
Joined
26 May 2018
Messages
1,989
Clarification can be found here:

https://www.gov.uk/guidance/tier-4-stay-at-home


The hysterical brigade will, no doubt, renew their efforts to close schools. Their demands should be resisted.
Many thanks for that, greatly appreciated. It does seem to have been that schools were originally overlooked.

I do hope that a way can be found to keep schools open. The reason is now clear for the rush to mass testing for the virus in schools. I know of a great many who struggled earlier in the year and it massively disadvantages those for whom school is often the most stable part of their lives.

Regarding transmission amongst students, I do think the post below makes the point very eloquently that we should guard against extrapolating our own personal experiences.

I note that it’s hard to find reliable information on the topic of outbreaks/likely rates of transmission in schools, newspaper articles tend to parrot the ‘COVID secure’ propaganda, whereby the impression is given that students stay 2 metres apart all the time and spend most of the day washing their hands.
All the other long standing human corona viruses are seasonal and the work on Covid so far shows it prefers winter conditions albeit slightly lower than typical UK winter humidity.

Keeping schools open helps most of the rest of the economy.

Transmission of the virus is known to be very uneven (high k factor) with ~70% of people not giving it to anyone else, ~10% to one other person and ~20% to two or more other people. what we really need to understand is that latter 20% category. Unsurprisingly most people on this thread report an outcome in the 70% bracket!

Hence most of the time you would expect no onward transmission.

Circa 60% of transmission is within households or care home etc. (and virtually unstoppable without vaccination) hence overall non household transmission numbers will appear comparatively low but are hugely significant in the household to household spread which is what all the restrictions are about.

The reported significantly higher case levels in under 18 in Kent, Essex, NE and SE London suggest that transmission is happening in those age groups, but is it in school, on the way to /from school or elsewhere?

As with other non household environment transmission the UK government has been distinctly lacking in decent research. What is needed is school testing in high under 18 case rate areas with samples for 4 testing types:
a) lateral flow tests (quick results and takes ~60% of positive cases out of circulation quickly)
b) PCR for better results but 24-48hours later
c) antibody test (to see who had it previously)
d) virus sequencing to see whether the strains are the same in different people to check if A could have given it to B or not. (E.g. how the new "Kent" strain was found and PHE do this on a small subset of swabs already.)

Analyse the data collected properly and attempt backward tracing.

Repeat with case studies for other non household environments.
 
Last edited:

chris11256

Member
Joined
27 Dec 2012
Messages
734
At my school we're still planning on opening as normal on the 11st. On the 4th we have our year 13 min for mock exams anyway and as per guidance the year 12 will be at home.

Although personally I'm expecting some fairly last minute notice that we'll shut until February. Personally it won't have much of an impact as I'm only in charge of IT and we've been up & running on Teams since September anyway and most teaching staff are comfortable using it.
 
Last edited:

sjpowermac

Established Member
Joined
26 May 2018
Messages
1,989
At my school we're still planning on opening as normal on the 11st. On the 4th we our year 13 are in for mock exams anyway and as per guidance the year 12 will be at home.

Although personally I'm expecting some fairly last minute notice that we'll shut until February. Personally it won't have much of an impact as I'm only in charge of IT and we've been up & running on Teams since September anyway and most teaching staff are comfortable using it.
As it is, it’s way too early for the government to tell schools what they want them to do: expect an announcement the day before the start of term!
 

Ianno87

Veteran Member
Joined
3 May 2015
Messages
15,215
I think there is a staggered return for university students planned? It's about a 5 week window, in Scotland at least.

Doesn't affect me, but I really would question the value of the majority of University students physically returning in the present circumstances, if so much teaching is going to be online anyway.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Top