How will schools be able to go back in September?

Jizique

timmy_mallet wrote: »

Farce. Utter utter farce. Either they go in and you forget about social distancng or they dont. Ni middle ground. Try socially distance school going-age children with one adult present. Not possible. The government needs to get a grip on their recommendations asap. If you dont want your child there. Remote learning. If a teacher doesn't want to be there, fine, 100% salary till they feel safe, and get someone who does in

Why should teachers get 100% salary if they decide not to work? Apart from the fact that they have strong unions and good political links.
If the schools are open and they decide not to work, how can the govt justify full pay?

The HorsesMouth

khalessi wrote: »

Are you suggesting no social distancing for schools

To suggest social distancing for anyone under the age of 10 in schools would show an extreme lack of insight into the life of a child that age. Not to mention the state of some of our schools infrastructure. How can you explain to a junior infant to stay away from their friends? No you can't share that crayon. No you cant go to the toilet as one other child is in the bathroom. No playing in the playground. Anyone suggesting that this is OK to ask children to do need to get a grip.

Ps I am a teacher and I am fully willing to go back to school in September without having to fully enforce social distancing. But handwashing regularly and sending kids home straight away with any symptoms and other small changes need to be enforced.

timmy_mallet

Jizique wrote: »

Why should teachers get 100% salary if they decide not to work? Apart from the fact that they have strong unions and good political links.
If the schools are open and they decide not to work, how can the govt justify full pay?

Because it's a global pandemic and sacrifices need to be made. We can sacrifice a few Bob for those who cant (health issues) or are unwilling (union agiitators).

khalessi

BonsaiKitten wrote: »

So who is doing the planning for students at home? I presume they'd have to be set work and not just told to go study. The teachers will be working their regular day in school, they won't be available for remote learning.

I presume they will have to do both, it will be interesting to see what is suggested.

timmy_mallet

The HorsesMouth wrote: »

To suggest social distancing for anyone under the age of 10 in schools would show an extreme lack of insight into the life of a child that age. Not to mention the state of some of our schools infrastructure. How can you explain to a junior infant to stay away from their friends? No you can't share that crayon. No you cant go to the toilet as one other child is in the bathroom. No playing in the playground. Anyone suggesting that this is OK to ask children to do need to get a grip.

Its absurd, I cant find a logical argument in favour of this working. 50/50 is meaningless, you still cannot enforce social distancing for children in school.

For that reason, there will be no school in September and until a vaccine is found. Distance learning till then. It is the fairest solution. If a vaccine is never found, then so be it, schools will never reopen.

Jizique

timmy_mallet wrote: »

Because it's a global pandemic and sacrifices need to be made. We can sacrifice a few Bob for those who cant (health issues) or are unwilling (union agiitators).

Not much sign of the teacher making a sacrifice if they expect 100% salary for extended summer holidays

jimmytwotimes 2013

khalessi wrote: »

I presume they will have to do both, it will be interesting to see what is suggested.

There's already a term for it from the BS departments in ETBs.

Blended Learning

timmy_mallet

Jizique wrote: »

Not much sign of the teacher making a sacrifice if they expect 100% salary for extended summer holidays

Then it's on them, and nobody else.

khalessi

Jizique wrote: »

Not much sign of the teacher making a sacrifice if they expect 100% salary for extended summer holidays

WHat extended holiday. Teachers are teaching online

BonsaiKitten

Personally what I would do is have the Department come up with a set roadmap - plan out week by week what topics schools should cover. Any teacher who can't come to work due to health reasons joins an online school and plans/delivers content online for children not attending school that week. This leaves the in-person teachers free to focus on the kids in front of them.

Might not be workable at secondary level but it could do primary kids some good. There's a load of holes in it (internet access etc) but it's hard to find the ideal solution.

BonsaiKitten

khalessi wrote: »

I presume they will have to do both, it will be interesting to see what is suggested.

I think that would be wrong myself as it's doubling teacher workload...but I have a sneaking suspicion they'll be expected to find the green jersey and do it.

timmy_mallet

BonsaiKitten wrote: »

Personally what I would do is have the Department come up with a set roadmap - plan out week by week what topics schools should cover. Any teacher who can't come to work due to health reasons joins an online school and plans/delivers content online for children not attending school that week. This leaves the in-person teachers free to focus on the kids in front of them.

Might not be workable at secondary level but it could do primary kids some good. There's a load of holes in it (internet access etc) but it's hard to find the ideal solution.

And maybe we can leave the 8 yr olds at home to do it themselves while their parents go to work too,.

jrosen

I dont know what the answer is. But I dont see how social distancing can be done in schools without the education of students suffering even more than they are suffering now. How long is that sustainable for?

We had an email the other day saying that our students are currently lagging behind where they should be. If this continues into September that gap will grow even more.
Should schools open in full and leave it up to each parent if they send their child or not??

I also think schools need to be far stricter with not accepting sick kids into class in the morning and also sending kids home. In other countries kids need to be fever free for 48 hours before they are allowed return to school. We should adopt that policy here.

Jizique

khalessi wrote: »

WHat extended holiday. Teachers are teaching online

Of course they are - what about Sept if schools reopen but they decide not to go back

timmy_mallet

BonsaiKitten wrote: »

I think that would be wrong myself as it's doubling teacher workload...but I have a sneaking suspicion they'll be expected to find the green jersey and do it.

I'd want double salary for double the work, cant see how unions would accept that and rightly so.

How many kids, as a %, have a health issue that would mean they cant come to school? Maybe a solution needs to he found for them asap.

Princess Consuela Bananahammock

JTMan wrote: »

The Sunday Times reports here (paywall):

- Some or all pupils spending weeks at school interspersed with alternate weeks studying at home.
- The 2021 Leaving Cert year is likely to be given priority in getting back to school, but the group is expected to look at a staggered return for non-exam years.

So most students will be 50% remote and 50% in classrooms.

timmy_mallet wrote: »

That's not a solution, it's a complete fudge that solves nothing. Either all on or all out, there is no middle ground. Which half? Which parents can choose which half, what sports do the miss out on. Half the education of children to save 2/3rds of the people that would be dead in a year anyway, and most of whom will be dead by September anyway (ohh, death, ohh, one life, ohhh, dont go there)

I like the idea, but obviously it'll only work for seondary students who don't need home supervision.

At that age, students should be able to work on their own (they're expected to study anyway) and smaller class sizes when in school would be benefitial. The only downside is the need for consequences for the gurriers.

khalessi wrote: »

WHat extended holiday. Teachers are teaching online

Don't feed....

BonsaiKitten

timmy_mallet wrote: »

And maybe we can leave the 8 yr olds at home to do it themselves while their parents go to work too,.

If we have to take a week on/week off approach then that will be out of teachers control.

Tbh I think social distancing is not workable in schools and we may be better off just going back en masse. Perhaps the department could actually properly fund soap and sanitiser this time...

khalessi

jrosen wrote: »

I dont know what the answer is. But I dont see how social distancing can be done in schools without the education of students suffering even more than they are suffering now. How long is that sustainable for?

We had an email the other day saying that our students are currently lagging behind where they should be. If this continues into September that gap will grow even more.
Should schools open in full and leave it up to each parent if they send their child or not??

I also think schools need to be far stricter with not accepting sick kids into class in the morning and also sending kids home. In other countries kids need to be fever free for 48 hours before they are allowed return to school. We should adopt that policy here.

Its the parents who need to be stricter they are the ones sending them in dosed to the eyeballs on calpol then not answering phones when asked to collect their child

Sammy2012

jrosen wrote: »

I dont know what the answer is. But I dont see how social distancing can be done in schools without the education of students suffering even more than they are suffering now. How long is that sustainable for?

We had an email the other day saying that our students are currently lagging behind where they should be. If this continues into September that gap will grow even more.
Should schools open in full and leave it up to each parent if they send their child or not??

I also think schools need to be far stricter with not accepting sick kids into class in the morning and also sending kids home. In other countries kids need to be fever free for 48 hours before they are allowed return to school. We should adopt that policy here.

Haha good one. First let me state I have no problem returning to work in Sept but am lucky that I can isolate myself away from the vulnerable people in my family. It will mean j cant see my parents and I'll have to sort alternative childcare but if my husband is working from home some days they will be doable. However people will not stop sending sick children to school. That will not happen. I often have kids coming in and vomiting after a few minutes and when asked were they feeling bad this morning they say I told whoever and they said I'd be fine. Schools are childcare for a lot of people (which I'm fine with that attitude) but it's an inconvenience to parents if the child is sick. We cant ask them to stay out. That's not allowed and unless that becomes law it just wont happen.

BonsaiKitten

jrosen wrote: »

I also think schools need to be far stricter with not accepting sick kids into class in the morning and also sending kids home. In other countries kids need to be fever free for 48 hours before they are allowed return to school. We should adopt that policy here.

Oh I agree. Some parents refuse to pick them up...dose them up with Calpol in the morning and when the child vomits all over the floor they somehow just don't see the school phonecalls coming in.

timmy_mallet

BonsaiKitten wrote: »

If we have to take a week on/week off approach then that will be out of teachers control.

Tbh I think social distancing is not workable in schools and we may be better off just going back en masse. Perhaps the department could actually properly fund soap and sanitiser this time...

Agree, and not fair to expect kids to do it or one adult to try enforce it.

En masse, or not at all. And reduced hours or divided classes doesn't resolve the social distancing issue, and that is seemingly the only issue.

jrosen

khalessi wrote: »

Its the parents who need to be stricter they are the ones sending them in dosed to the eyeballs on calpol then not answering phones when asked to collect their child

I totally agree with you, however they are availing of a loop hole.

eg, my local school. I could pick my vomiting child up today but have them in the line tomorrow morning. This should not be allowed. Changes have to be made at the top to have this enforced across the board.

JTMan

If this is proven true then we can forget about schools reopening in September.

Guardian article here about mystery coronavirus illness after three children die.

Their symptoms are similar to toxic-shock syndrome and Kawasaki disease, an illness with no known cause that mainly affects children under five.

khalessi

JTMan wrote: »

If this is proven true then we can forget about schools reopening in September.

Guardian article here about mystery coronavirus illness after three children die.

Their symptoms are similar to toxic-shock syndrome and Kawasaki disease, an illness with no known cause that mainly affects children under five.

Yup it is rare at the moment but the cases slowly seem to be increasing. It seems for every two steps we take forward in knowledge about Covid19, it knocks us back one with a new development. It is a tricky devious little sucker of a virus.

Between that and the study realeased showing children can catch and spread it as easily as adults, did they I wonder have any influence on the cancelling of the LC

timmy_mallet

JTMan wrote: »

If this is proven true then we can forget about schools reopening in September.

Guardian article here about mystery coronavirus illness after three children die.

Their symptoms are similar to toxic-shock syndrome and Kawasaki disease, an illness with no known cause that mainly affects children under five.

Didn't the WHO issue a surveillance warning for this, and then withdraw it?

niallo27

timmy_mallet wrote: »

Didn't the WHO issue a surveillance warning for this, and then withdraw it?

The WHO say stuff and withdraw it a lot. The are actually giving the real The WHO a bad name.

timmy_mallet

niallo27 wrote: »

The WHO say stuff and withdraw it a lot. The are actually giving the real The WHO a bad name.

'No evidence of human-to-human COVID-19 transmission' is on the Greatest Hits Vol. 1.

morebabies

I know some parents are clamouring to have their children return to "normality", but as an earlier poster said, what would be normal about socially distancing children in school? That could freak them out more than being at home and distance learning. I'm thinking particularly of the younger children.

My 5 year old for example - the teacher would have to constantly roar at them to stay apart, my little man just wouldn't get it and would wonder why teacher had suddenly become so cross.

I think we have to treat this pandemic as a wartime scenario, the economy will suffer, yes, but unless we're comfortable with a huge rise in the number of deaths, we need to plan for quarantine into 2021, and get the Dept of Education to start preparing for a longer term scenario of online teaching.

As Dr. Holohan said a few weeks ago, it will be a case of rolling restrictions until a vaccine / effective treatment is found, so with the expected rise in flu and other viruses in winter, would it not be wise to avoid that potential disruption of stopping and starting classes and just accept the situation is unprecedented and requires unprecedented measures?

timmy_mallet

morebabies wrote: »

I know some parents are clamouring to have their children return to "normality", but as an earlier poster said, what would be normal about socially distancing children in school? That could freak them out more than being at home and distance learning. I'm thinking particularly of the younger children.

My 5 year old for example - the teacher would have to constantly roar at them to stay apart, my little man just wouldn't get it and would wonder why teacher had suddenly become so cross.

I think we have to treat this pandemic as a wartime scenario, the economy will suffer, yes, but unless we're comfortable with a huge rise in the number of deaths, we need to plan for quarantine into 2021, and get the Dept of Education to start preparing for a longer term scenario of online teaching.

As Dr. Holohan said a few weeks ago, it will be a case of rolling restrictions until a vaccine / effective treatment is found, so with the expected rise in flu and other viruses in winter, would it not be wise to avoid that potential disruption of stopping and starting classes and just accept the situation is unprecedented and requires unprecedented measures?

As I said earlier, given the conservative nature of parents and many CMOs and govts., there will be no school until a vaccine is found. If no vaccine is found, children will never be educated in schools again. I don't see how people haven't got their heads around this yet.

timmy_mallet

morebabies wrote: »

I know some parents are clamouring to have their children return to "normality", but as an earlier poster said, what would be normal about socially distancing children in school? That could freak them out more than being at home and distance learning. I'm thinking particularly of the younger children.

My 5 year old for example - the teacher would have to constantly roar at them to stay apart, my little man just wouldn't get it and would wonder why teacher had suddenly become so cross.

I think we have to treat this pandemic as a wartime scenario, the economy will suffer, yes, but unless we're comfortable with a huge rise in the number of deaths, we need to plan for quarantine into 2021, and get the Dept of Education to start preparing for a longer term scenario of online teaching.

As Dr. Holohan said a few weeks ago, it will be a case of rolling restrictions until a vaccine / effective treatment is found, so with the expected rise in flu and other viruses in winter, would it not be wise to avoid that potential disruption of stopping and starting classes and just accept the situation is unprecedented and requires unprecedented measures?

Or they could invest in the public health infrastructure and we could deal with the loss of the very close to death and the unhealthy, for the benefit of society and it's children. But no. The 'one life' etc. brigade will force a generation into a lack of formal education and a bleak future.