How will schools be able to go back in September?

DesignerDublin

There may be lots of absences, will every runny nose or cough be sent home? I have 3 kids, during winter at least one always has some sort of cold. This is going to be challenging.

wirelessdude01

caveat emptor wrote: »

I heard on this that there will be a "pool" of substitute teachers which schools in each area / region can draw from when needed.

This sounds absolutely fvcking crazy after what we learned from the Nursing home scandal and agency staff.?

Do I have that wrong?

58 of them nationwide. Approx 3.5 teachers per panel.

caveat emptor

wirelessdude01 wrote: »

58 of them nationwide. Approx 3.5 teachers per panel.

and there's the bubble burst.
a pool of people that have to cover for every teacher that gets a sniffle in winter.
intermingling between schools in different areas.

Sounds like a good plan.

swear we knew nothing about public health.

lulublue22

downthemiddle wrote: »

The "practical compromise" that the DES has made is to sacrifice the learning of the most vulnerable in our school communities. They have employed 180 extra teachers at primary level to cover teachers on sick leave. This will provide cover for approximately 420 schools out of 3,305. The other schools are bound by
https://www.education.ie/en/Circulars-and-Forms/Active-Circulars/cl0045_2020.pdf
This states that if a school is unable to find substitute cover 'For teachers in mainstream classes, schools use other non-mainstream teachers to
cover the absence.'
Schools are being instructed to remove support from children with Special Educational Needs to cover classes. What a wonderful compromise.

This really annoys me - those children who need support the most to do without. For all the talk re the effect on children’s education there doesn’t seem to be any consideration given to those vulnerable children. SET covering classes is a disgrace.

Lillyfae

Boggles wrote: »

Sorry I am quoting the Minister for Education for Holland who made a statement on it yesterday evening. She doesn't seem to think so.

Who is your source?

It's funny that wasn't on the news yesterday, here in the Netherlands.

seamus

Lillyfae wrote: »

When the children were sent home from schools in the Netherlands, the staff (teachers and otherwise) immediately started planning for them to return as soon as possible. Deep cleaning. Reconfiguring classrooms. Sourcng masks and gloves. Setting up handwashing stations at the entrance to buildings. Figuring out a one way system. Staff protocols, visitor protocols, all the rest. Nobody asked the government for guidance or advice specific to schools. They were following the national broadcasts like everyone else and adapting to the latest information.

It really seems like our principals have been doing nothing to prepare.

Yes, the guidelines are coming way too late, but they also don't contain anything unexpected. You can go back on this thread and see that I predicted basically all of the measures more than a month ago. And I'm not especially clever, half of the country knew what would be required, so there's no good reason why schools couldn't prepare for the return without the guidelines.

At this stage they should only needs to place final orders for equipment, arrange building work and schedule staff training. Planning one-way systems, class layouts, ingress/egress protocols, etc should have been done by the principals weeks ago; anyone with a shred of competence predicted what would be required before the school year had even ended.

downthemiddle

lulublue22 wrote: »

This really annoys me - those children who need support the most to do without. For all the talk re the effect on children’s education there doesn’t seem to be any consideration given to those vulnerable children. SET covering classes is a disgrace.

This is the crux of the issue. This plan has nothing to do with children returning to education safely. It is an economic decision.
The DES are sacrificing our most vulnerable at a time when they will need support more than ever.

jimmytwotimes 2013

Peter Flynt wrote: »

Didn't the Department draw up plans for 24 students in 7m x 7m rooms (which is impossible unless you consider all students to be infinitesimal small particles of mass)?

What happens if, as is often the case, the class exceeds 24?

Who decides which 6 leave in a class of 30?

I think the 6 are to be rotated and they are to watch a live steam of the class from a different room while supervised.

However if there are 6 students coming out of say 10 classes (conservative estimate) they are just moving a new problem of 60 students to another part of the school, most likely to a computer room that already has a class in it.

Cool plan.

Boggles

Boggles wrote: »

Absolutely.

Like I said after Wave 2 just before Wave 3.

Every day is a learning day.

#science.

# science like the WHO scientists who have stated this is spreading in a single wave with no evidence yet of a seasonal effect?

Bobtheman

seamus wrote: »

It really seems like our principals have been doing nothing to prepare.

Yes, the guidelines are coming way too late, but they also don't contain anything unexpected. You can go back on this thread and see that I predicted basically all of the measures more than a month ago. And I'm not especially clever, half of the country knew what would be required, so there's no good reason why schools couldn't prepare for the return without the guidelines.

At this stage they should only needs to place final orders for equipment, arrange building work and schedule staff training. Planning one-way systems, class layouts, ingress/egress protocols, etc should have been done by the principals weeks ago; anyone with a shred of competence predicted what would be required before the school year had even ended.

You are probably right about some of this but we are not Principals. We have no idea of the bureachracy of ordering equipment when the money is not in your account already or how procurement works. It can also be hard to hire people for a job that doesn't really start for a few weeks. How many cleaners are lining up to get into schools?

Peter Flynt

jimmytwotimes 2013 wrote: »

I think the 6 are to be rotated and they are to watch a live steam of the class from a different room while supervised.

However if there are 6 students coming out of say 10 classes (conservative estimate) they are just moving a new problem of 60 students to another part of the school, most likely to a computer room that already has a class in it.

Cool plan.

The real plan I'd say is this:

Come up with bullsh*t to get teachers/students all back in.
Once there they then know that the 'live stream' of the class is a non-starter, thus forcing principals to put pressure on teachers to take the full class.

downthemiddle

seamus wrote: »

It really seems like our principals have been doing nothing to prepare.

Perhaps you can provide some evidence of this.

jimmytwotimes 2013

Peter Flynt wrote: »

The real plan I'd say is this:

Come up with bullsh*t to get teachers/students all back in.
Once there they then know that the 'live stream' of the class is a non-starter, thus forcing principals to put pressure on teachers to take the full class.

Oh 100% you'll get asked to take more, "shur it's only an extra 4 kids"

ginoginelli

There has been so little in the media critizing this disastrous plan. Rte and primetime in particular are giving the impression that the plan is a good one and largely endorsed.

So many people take what these outlets say as gospel, and they will trust that everything is being done to keep their kids safe. This is just not the case. The government have effectively decided to roll the dice with a poorly conceived plan and pray that they can keep the 'collateral damage' at a minimum.

Boggles

Deleted User wrote: »

# science like the WHO scientists who have stated this is spreading in a single wave with no evidence yet of a seasonal effect?

Why are WHO scientists pointing out the blatantly obvious? You just need to take a look at Florida and Texas, no it isn't seasonal.

More evidence why literally no one is listening to the WHO anymore.

Waves are determined by the ability of the country or region to suppress the virus. Right now we are doing a very good job of that, this "plan" scuppers that good work IMO.

#science.

lulublue22

downthemiddle wrote: »

Perhaps you can provide some evidence of this.

I’m not one to stay quiet if I feel something needs to be said in school. I don’t always see eye to eye with management. What I will say is my principal has played a blinder - very proactive in trying to cover all bases. I’d say the configure the room to hold 32 while SD will cause some consternation but as a school we will open in Sep with as much of these guidelines implemented as possible due to the hard graft of management and staff. For those laying the blame at managements door - they remind me of the hurlers on the ditch - every game won within the first 5 mins yet they never seem to actually make it onto the pitch. For all those dropping your children to school in Sep - it’s only possible due to management and staff pulling out all the stops between now and then. Of course all teachers ever do is stand at the top of the class.:rolleyes:

wirelessdude01

jimmytwotimes 2013 wrote: »

I think the 6 are to be rotated and they are to watch a live steam of the class from a different room while supervised.

However if there are 6 students coming out of say 10 classes (conservative estimate) they are just moving a new problem of 60 students to another part of the school, most likely to a computer room that already has a class in it.

Cool plan.

Well we have ZERO empty rooms and no spare staff. Plan is so full of holes that are left up to schools to try and figure out.

jimmytwotimes 2013

wirelessdude01 wrote: »

Well we have ZERO empty rooms and no spare staff. Plan is so full of holes that are left up to schools to try and figure out.

Same

Peter Flynt

ginoginelli wrote: »

There has been so little in the media critizing this disastrous plan. Rte and primetime in particular are giving the impression that the plan is a good one and largely endorsed.

The reality is that the plan IS largely endorsed.
The unions are so weak & powerless that they're afraid to oppose anything - even when it comes to the lives of their members.

This is not entirely a criticism of the unions.
It's the realpolitik of the situation.
Any issues raised or concerns will be seized upon by the media and used to attack teachers and the profession with the anti-teacher trolling brigade rubbing their hands with glee.

The issue is not about safety anymore - how could it be as the 'plan' is a disgrace?
The issue is about money - teachers doing their 'bit'.

That's a risky decision to take as provoking a second wave (already underway in Germany, Belgium & Spain) will close schools anyway. There's no 'proceeding with caution' but 'just get on with it' in the face of complete denial. In many ways it reminds me of brexit and the attitude of the brexiteers.

Icantthinkof1

Can I ask a question?
Myself and my children have a condition that places us in the extremely high risk groups.
They have only recently been diagnosed. Should I be contacting the principals about their conditions and my concerns about them returning to school- is this the correct route to go down? I don’t want to stress the principals out anymore than they already are. Is there someone else I should be contacting about it?
Like can I request that they are sat next to a window would that even make a difference? I’m finding it very hard as their consultants aren’t telling me straight out that they shouldn’t return to school as risk to children is considered low

caveat emptor

Icantthinkof1 wrote: »

Can I ask a question?
Myself and my children have a condition that places us in the extremely high risk groups.
They have only recently been diagnosed. Should I be contacting the principals about their conditions and my concerns about them returning to school- is this the correct route to go down? I don’t want to stress the principals out anymore than they already are. Is there someone else I should be contacting about it?
Like can I request that they are sat next to a window would that even make a difference? I’m finding it very hard as their consultants aren’t telling me straight out that they shouldn’t return to school as risk to children is considered low

Get a second opinion from a paediatrician if you are not convinced.

Boggles

Boggles wrote: »

Why are WHO scientists pointing out the blatantly obvious? You just need to take a look at Florida and Texas, no it isn't seasonal.

More evidence why literally no one is listening to the WHO anymore.

Waves are determined by the ability of the country or region to suppress the virus. Right now we are doing a very good job of that, this "plan" scuppers that good work IMO.

#science.

Using #science doesn’t make you right in everything you say.

Second wave can only arise when we move out of suppression and virus naturally abated. By definition we are suppressing the first wave and a resurgence is either the failure of the suppression measures or early relaxation of suppression measures, it is all part of the first wave though.

downthemiddle

Icantthinkof1 wrote: »

Can I ask a question?
Myself and my children have a condition that places us in the extremely high risk groups.
They have only recently been diagnosed. Should I be contacting the principals about their conditions and my concerns about them returning to school- is this the correct route to go down? I don’t want to stress the principals out anymore than they already are. Is there someone else I should be contacting about it?
Like can I request that they are sat next to a window would that even make a difference? I’m finding it very hard as their consultants aren’t telling me straight out that they shouldn’t return to school as risk to children is considered low

Yes contact the school outlining your concerns. Work with the school to draw up a plan to meet your children's needs. The sooner the school are aware of this issue the sooner it can be dealt with and your concerns can be eased.

wirelessdude01

Icantthinkof1 wrote: »

Can I ask a question?
Myself and my children have a condition that places us in the high risk groups.
They have only recently been diagnosed. Should I be contacting the principals about their conditions and my concerns about them returning to school- is this the correct route to go down? I don’t want to stress the principals out anymore than they already are. Is there someone else I should be contacting about it?
Like can I request that they are sat next to a window would that even make a difference? I’m finding it very hard as their consultants aren’t telling me straight out that they shouldn’t return to school as risk to children is considered low

You need to inform the principal. Principal can only plan for home learning if they are aware of the potential need.

Loafing Oaf

Icantthinkof1 wrote: »

Can I ask a question?
Myself and my children have a condition that places us in the extremely high risk groups.
They have only recently been diagnosed. Should I be contacting the principals about their conditions and my concerns about them returning to school- is this the correct route to go down? I don’t want to stress the principals out anymore than they already are. Is there someone else I should be contacting about it?
Like can I request that they are sat next to a window would that even make a difference? I’m finding it very hard as their consultants aren’t telling me straight out that they shouldn’t return to school as risk to children is considered low

I'm sure the principals would find the time to address your concerns. After all, keeping people like you and your children safe is ultimately the object of the entire exercise.

caveat emptor

Deleted User wrote: »

Using #science doesn’t make you right in everything you say.

Second wave can only arise when we move out of suppression and virus naturally abated. By definition we are suppressing the first wave and a resurgence is either the failure of the suppression measures or early relaxation of suppression measures, it is all part of the first wave though.

\


Yeah "the science should not stand in the way of this". Dangerous strategy.
How's that working out for them?

........

Child hospitalizations from Covid-19 surge 23% in Florida as schools statewide must reopen

https://edition.cnn.com/2020/07/27/health/florida-covid-children-hospitalizations/index.html

Lillyfae

Icantthinkof1 wrote: »

I’m finding it very hard as their consultants aren’t telling me straight out that they shouldn’t return to school as risk to children is considered low

You need to ask the consultant straight out, and if they won't tell you straight out, get a second opinion. Otherwise, don't worry for a second about "stressing the principal out". This:

downthemiddle wrote: »

Yes contact the school outlining your concerns. Work with the school to draw up a plan to meet your children's needs. The sooner the school are aware of this issue the sooner it can be dealt with and your concerns can be eased.

....is a bit premature at this stage when you don't know if there is a risk but it is the principal's remit to be handling this. Nobody is forced into being principal, and they are paid taking into account the extra "stress".

lulublue22

Icantthinkof1 wrote: »

Can I ask a question?
Myself and my children have a condition that places us in the high risk groups.
They have only recently been diagnosed. Should I be contacting the principals about their conditions and my concerns about them returning to school- is this the correct route to go down? I don’t want to stress the principals out anymore than they already are. Is there someone else I should be contacting about it?
Like can I request that they are sat next to a window would that even make a difference? I’m finding it very hard as their consultants aren’t telling me straight out that they shouldn’t return to school as risk to children is considered low[/QUOTE

I would ask my GP- they often know our history better than the consultant. Have a chat with your gp and see what they say. Outline your concerns re numbers in class / space to SD etc if that’s part of your concerns. I don’t know what contacting the principal will do for you - they won’t be able to advise if your child should / should not go back to school. They can facilitate your request to sit near a window and there will be increased hygiene measures in schools . Will this be sufficient for your child ?

ETA obviously advise the school re underlying illness as they will need to know. Teacher can keep an extra eye on your child re hand washing, SD if possible etc.

drunkmonkey

downthemiddle wrote: »

The "practical compromise" that the DES has made is to sacrifice the learning of the most vulnerable in our school communities. They have employed 180 extra teachers at primary level to cover teachers on sick leave. This will provide cover for approximately 420 schools out of 3,305. The other schools are bound by
https://www.education.ie/en/Circulars-and-Forms/Active-Circulars/cl0045_2020.pdf
This states that if a school is unable to find substitute cover 'For teachers in mainstream classes, schools use other non-mainstream teachers to
cover the absence.'
Schools are being instructed to remove support from children with Special Educational Needs to cover classes. What a wonderful compromise.

If we have 180 teachers out sick with suspected Covid we have a major problem, all schools will be closed indefinitely.

Boggles

Deleted User wrote: »

Using #science doesn’t make you right in everything you say.

Second wave can only arise when we move out of suppression and virus naturally abated. By definition we are suppressing the first wave and a resurgence is either the failure of the suppression measures or early relaxation of suppression measures, it is all part of the first wave though.

Medical Definition of Second wave

A phenomenon of infections that can develop during a pandemic. The disease infects one group of people first. Infections appear to decrease. And then, infections increase in a different part of the population, resulting in a second wave of infections.

caveat emptor

caveat emptor wrote: »

\


Yeah "the science should not stand in the way of this". Dangerous strategy.
How's that working out for them?

........


https://edition.cnn.com/2020/07/27/health/florida-covid-children-hospitalizations/index.html

See, I am not denying the science at all if that’s what your suggesting. I am saying finishing a post with #science is not using science as a basis for posts, it’s using it as a smokescreen for a lack of scientific rigour in analysis of the situation. And no one is comparing the situation in Florida to that here. But we do need to accept an evidence based level of risk. Without it life grinds to a halt.

Boggles

Boggles wrote: »

Medical Definition of Second wave

Appear to decrease.,ie not suppressed artificially through correct interventions

Icantthinkof1

Thanks for your replies- I’ll contact our GP and see what he advises and as some of you mentioned if needs be I’ll request to be referred for a second opinion and will contact the principals then.

Boggles

Deleted User wrote: »

Appear to decrease.,ie not suppressed artificially through correct interventions

Sorry, do you think this is the first pandemic we have "suppressed artificially"?

jimmytwotimes 2013

Luke O'Neill in favour of masks at 2nd level for those of you who just thought the idea came from paranoid teachers

He retweeted this

https://twitter.com/MjoconorMary/status/1288393627581009926?s=19

lulublue22

Lillyfae wrote: »

....is a bit premature at this stage when you don't know if there is a risk but it is the principal's remit to be handling this. Nobody is forced into being principal, and they are paid taking into account the extra "stress".

No it’s not - it is good practice to inform principal of any underlying illness. It may have consequences that are not relevant to covid at all but are relevant in the school context. Depending on the illness drawing up a plan could be as simply as x needs to eat 3 times in the school day. Or it could involve checking bloods x amount if times and procedures to follow depending on the results or it may involve no plan what so ever.

downthemiddle

drunkmonkey wrote: »

If we have 180 teachers out sick with suspected Covid we have a major problem, all schools will be closed indefinitely.

Sometimes it is better to make a genuine attempt to understand the issue rather than jumping in feet first.
There was no mention of Covid in the post. It was a comment on how the DES are prepared to sacrifice the learning of children with Special Educational Needs.
Perhaps you are happy to pay that price to reopen schools but some of us feel that it is morally and ethically wrong.

caveat emptor

Deleted User wrote: »

Appear to decrease.,ie not suppressed artificially through correct interventions

Can you stop the whataboutery regarding definition of a wave?
Look at the sea. It goes up, it goes down, out goes back up.
Trying to get technical about what is self evident is not a good look.

Confirmed with a 6 year old. Looks like a duck, quacks like a duck.
It's a fvcking duck.

combat14

jimmytwotimes 2013 wrote: »

Luke O'Neill in favour of masks at 2nd level for those of you who just thought the idea came from paranoid teachers

He retweeted this

https://twitter.com/MjoconorMary/status/1288393627581009926?s=19

well if that is what the experts are saying kids and teachers need to wear masks in school simple as

jimmytwotimes 2013

jimmytwotimes 2013 wrote: »

Luke O'Neill in favour of masks at 2nd level for those of you who just thought the idea came from paranoid teachers

He retweeted this

https://twitter.com/MjoconorMary/status/1288393627581009926?s=19

Agree with use for 2nd level classrooms

lulublue22

drunkmonkey wrote: »

If we have 180 teachers out sick with suspected Covid we have a major problem, all schools will be closed indefinitely.

Yes because the only illness any teacher is going to get will be covid. :rolleyes:
If you think supervision of classes by SET is not going to be necessary you are deluded.

Boggles

Some schools stating they will have to mandate for masks social distancing under the "plan" impossible.

All though that is not recommended by the Department.

Blame deflection 101.

wirelessdude01

drunkmonkey wrote: »

If we have 180 teachers out sick with suspected Covid we have a major problem, all schools will be closed indefinitely.

Doesn't mean Covid sick. If you have a cough or a sniffle to have to call in sick. No ploughing through allowed like every other year.

lulublue22

wirelessdude01 wrote: »

Doesn't mean Covid sick. If you have a cough or a sniffle to have to call in sick. No ploughing through allowed like every other year.

SET at this stage is a joke - will have their regular caseload , cater for high-risk children who are immunocompromised and can’t attend school and also cover for mainstream class teachers who are sick. It’s like the gov are setting schools up to fail. Can you imagine a parent of an immunocompromised child - stressed to the hilt anyhow and then fuming cos their school is not catering for their child. All the while the SET teacher/s chasing their tails trying to cover everything. Nightmare.

wirelessdude01

wirelessdude01 wrote: »

Doesn't mean Covid sick. If you have a cough or a sniffle to have to call in sick. No ploughing through allowed like every other year.

And get tested and get the all clear within 48 hours if not covid

Lillyfae

lulublue22 wrote: »

No it’s not - it is good practice to inform principal of any underlying illness. It may have consequences that are not relevant to covid at all but are relevant in the school context. Depending on the illness drawing up a plan could be as simply as x needs to eat 3 times in the school day. Or it could involve checking bloods x amount if times and procedures to follow depending on the results or it may involve no plan what so ever.

Yes that's true, but very much depends on the illness whether any action will be necessary at all.

lulublue22

Deleted User wrote: »

And get tested and get the all clear within 48 hours if not covid

Yes and who covers this 48 hours - SET - two days taken from those children who need it the most when 1 teacher is absent. This doesn’t a/c for any other illness with longer absences.

lulublue22

Lillyfae wrote: »

Yes that's true, but very much depends on the illness whether any action will be necessary at all.

Totally but good practice to inform principal.

ChelseaRentBoy

Icantthinkof1 wrote: »

Can I ask a question?
Myself and my children have a condition that places us in the extremely high risk groups.
They have only recently been diagnosed. Should I be contacting the principals about their conditions and my concerns about them returning to school- is this the correct route to go down? I don’t want to stress the principals out anymore than they already are. Is there someone else I should be contacting about it?
Like can I request that they are sat next to a window would that even make a difference? I’m finding it very hard as their consultants aren’t telling me straight out that they shouldn’t return to school as risk to children is considered low

Please don't take any advice from Boards.ie.

Seek professional advice.

caveat emptor

caveat emptor wrote: »

Can you stop the whataboutery regarding definition of a wave?
Look at the sea. It goes up, it goes down, out goes back up.
Trying to get technical about what is self evident is not a good look.

Confirmed with a 6 year old. Looks like a duck, quacks like a duck.
It's a fvcking duck.

In a sense of isolation it’s not a second wave. Plus they f’d up suppression.And the WHO don’t agree, and they know more than a 6 year old