Schools closed until February? (part 3)

History Queen

HerrKuehn wrote: »

well the option is open to parents, if they feel the need and are able, to pull the children out early.

Agreed.

HerrKuehn

History Queen wrote: »

Agreed.

So, if he isn't in a position to be issuing public health advice and the parents already have the option to take kids out if they need to, I am not sure why he suggested it.
I would imagine there will be quite a few kids out on the Monday and Tuesday anyway. I am off, so if the kids want to stay at home they can, if there is something going on that they really want to do then they can go in.

khalessi

Norma ordering school to reopen

lulublue22

khalessi wrote: »

Norma ordering school to reopen

Wonder will there be a flurry of emails / calls from the dep & inspectorate re the standardise xmas hols - according to one poster their primary is closing on the 18th .

According to twitter school has confirmed they will be open on Mon. The dep has spoken !

History Queen

HerrKuehn wrote: »

So, if he isn't in a position to be issuing public health advice and the parents already have the option to take kids out if they need to, I am not sure why he suggested it.
I would imagine there will be quite a few kids out on the Monday and Tuesday anyway. I am off, so if the kids want to stay at home they can, if there is something going on that they really want to do then they can go in.

He didn't suggest it originally
Some parents don't want their kids missing school if others are in. Some fear tusla. Overall the horse has bolted now anyway on the idea I feel.

HerrKuehn

History Queen wrote: »

He didn't suggest it originally
Some parents don't wamt their kids missing school if others are in. Some fear tusla. Overall the horse has bolted now anyway on the idea I feel.

Well the reason given was teacher fatigue if I remember correctly. It has been a long and draining year, but it has been a lot longer for some than others. As an example, what do you think happens when a hospital ward is short staffed as some are out with covid? They ask the remaining staff to do extra shifts and the staff don't want to leave their colleagues short. So they work extra shifts, in an environment where the likelihood of picking it up is high. The last thing you want to do is go in and work even more hours in that environment, but they really feel they have a choice. If you have kids, then you have to try and work around it, maybe the partner can work on the weekends or late into the evenings. There has been 9 months of that. That is where the eye rolling about "Teacher fatigue" is coming from.

mirrorwall14

khalessi wrote: »

Norma ordering school to reopen

Source?

In relation to the school calendar. There is massive confusion and mixing up of three different scenarios here which all teachers are familiar with. In the interest of putting it to bed

The first thing to be aware of is that there is a standardised school year set by the department every three years. Every school in the country begins with this as their base calendar.

The second is croke park hours and days in "lieu". A school may choose to come back earlier than the standardised calendar. Coming back early is one of two situations. The first is where the staff are doing croke park hours in which case there is no change to the standardised calendar for students. However, the students can also come back early for a teaching day order to have a "day to play with" during the year. These 1/2 days are usually used for a long weekend to break up the longer terms. I have never heard of a school having more than two of these. This all has to be agreed BEFORE the end of the previous school year, signd off on and the calendar published for parents. These days cannot be changed during the year.

The third is the circular which has been referenced. This is to deal with unforeseen issues in one particular school for an emergency. For example, a school (before this circular) had an exploded boiler which shut the school down for 3 days until they got a patch job allowing them to continue. If this had been since this circular, they would have been required to come back in during the dates listed in the circular to make up these days. This circular was specifically brought in after the very bad snow winters so that schools and parents planned for the possibility of making back up days during those two breaks and didn't book holidays etc.

This circular does not apply to covid outbreaks. Public health are the only ones organising closures. Schools that closed off their own bat have been ordered to reopen. Schools have been told not to support students staying at home. The department is very much laying down the law in relation to what schools can or cannot do in relation to covid

I'm not even sure why I pop in to read this thread anymore but for the odd few who are here for information this might help

meeeeh

mirrorwall14 wrote: »

Source?

The Claremorris school principal was on Newstalk and he said they were told to reopen on Monday.

lulublue22

mirrorwall14 wrote: »

Source?

In relation to the school calendar. There is massive confusion and mixing up of three different scenarios here which all teachers are familiar with. In the interest of putting it to bed

The first thing to be aware of is that there is a standardised school year set by the department every three years. Every school in the country begins with this as their base calendar.

The second is croke park hours and days in "lieu". A school may choose to come back earlier than the standardised calendar. Coming back early is one of two situations. The first is where the staff are doing croke park hours in which case there is no change to the standardised calendar for students. However, the students can also come back early for a teaching day order to have a "day to play with" during the year. These 1/2 days are usually used for a long weekend to break up the longer terms. I have never heard of a school having more than two of these. This all has to be agreed BEFORE the end of the previous school year, signd off on and the calendar published for parents. These days cannot be changed during the year.

The third is the circular which has been referenced. This is to deal with unforeseen issues in one particular school for an emergency. For example, a school (before this circular) had an exploded boiler which shut the school down for 3 days until they got a patch job allowing them to continue. If this had been since this circular, they would have been required to come back in during the dates listed in the circular to make up these days. This circular was specifically brought in after the very bad snow winters so that schools and parents planned for the possibility of making back up days during those two breaks and didn't book holidays etc.

This circular does not apply to covid outbreaks. Public health are the only ones organising closures. Schools that closed off their own bat have been ordered to reopen. Schools have been told not to support students staying at home. The department is very much laying down the law in relation to what schools can or cannot do in relation to covid

I'm not even sure why I pop in to read this thread anymore but for the odd few who are here for information this might help

Copy of the text/ email sent to parents re conversation with dep at 2:30 today - its on the preventing outbreaks page on facebook. On twitter a journalist who had the principal on his radio show today twitted that principal confirmed school reopening on Mon. Of course this is all social media but very difficult to find any info anywhere else. INTO suspiciously quiet.

History Queen

HerrKuehn wrote: »

Well the reason given was teacher fatigue if I remember correctly. It has been a long and draining year, but it has been a lot longer for some than others. As an example, what do you think happens when a hospital ward is short staffed as some are out with covid? They ask the remaining staff to do extra shifts and the staff don't want to leave their colleagues short. So they work extra shifts, in an environment where the likelihood of picking it up is high. The last thing you want to do is go in and work even more hours in that environment, but they really feel they have a choice. If you have kids, then you have to try and work around it, maybe the partner can work on the weekends or late into the evenings. There has been 9 months of that. That is where the eye rolling about "Teacher fatigue" is coming from.

I know. That's why i said he was an idiot. I don't agree with him

meeeeh

lulublue22 wrote: »

Copy of the text/ email sent to parents re conversation with dep at 2:30 today - its on the preventing outbreaks page on facebook. On twitter a journalist who had the principal on his radio show today twitted that principal confirmed school reopening on Mon. Of course this is all social media but very difficult to find any info anywhere else. INTO suspiciously quiet.

Would INTO want to interfere? With the decision to close comes also responsibility for that decision. If principals are suddenly responsible for that there could be a lot of extra pressure on them.

History Queen

Link to details re Claremorris School

https://www.newstalk.com/news/co-mayo-school-reverses-decision-to-close-until-after-christmas-1121104?utm_medium=Social&utm_source=Twitter#Echobox=1607709969

Smacruairi

Lillyfae wrote: »

Oh look! A school that were able to do that. Cue questions and disbelief.

I'm sure a humble reassessment of this post is forthcoming in light of the recent claremorris update.

lulublue22

meeeeh wrote: »

Would INTO want to interfere? With the decision to close comes also responsibility for that decision. If principals are suddenly responsible for that there could be a lot of extra pressure on them.

If the rate of infection in that school is 7.2% in an area with 3 x the level of community transmission than the national average and the school is struggling to get subs to cover absent teachers I would expect the INTO to get behind that school and support the principal to resolve the situation. I’m not advocating decisions around closing should devolve to principals.

meeeeh

lulublue22 wrote: »

If the rate of infection in that school is 7.2% in an area with 3 x the level of community transmission than the national average and the school is struggling to get subs to cover absent teachers I would expect the INTO to get behind that school and support the principal to resolve the situation. I’m not advocating decisions around closing should devolve to principals.

I'm not actually saying they were wrong to close my personal opinion it would be just as easy to close but it would have to seen like it was public health decision. You can't go against public health though, they have to have the authority to tell someone to close or reopen.

lulublue22

meeeeh wrote: »

I'm not actually saying they were wrong to close my personal opinion it would be just as easy to close but it would have to seen like it was public health decision. You can't go against public health though, they have to have the authority to tell someone to close or reopen.

I actually don’t know if they were right or wrong to close either. However given the recent school closure case in Cork coupled with a few decisions I’ve heard about at local level I ‘m not convinced PH always get it right. 7.2 % infection rate if true seems particularly high in an area of high community transmission. I would be erring on the side of caution - the sub issue is also a concern.

ETA - I’ve no doubt the school didn’t take the decision lightly.

deiseindublin

Lillyfae wrote: »

I would wonder if you've worked in enough schools to create a big enough sample.

You think you are more qualified, living outside of the country, never having taught in our system or any system, with no kids in an Irish school?

F*cking incredible, I'm in awe of you.

deiseindublin

I'm not sure if the text of the SSY circular was posted here already but just in case anybody is in any doubt, here's the line that says local management can't just decide to tweak end of term dates. This 3-year cycle SSY circular was published in late January 2020.

3. General
The agreement reached covers the arrangements that will apply in all schools
from the start of the 2020/21 school year and covers three school years. The
parties will review the operation of the arrangements not later than the autumn of 2022 for the purpose of agreeing the arrangements that will apply subsequently and have agreed that in the event that any unforeseen difficulty arises in relation to the operation of the arrangements now agreed the matter can be raised at the Teachers’ Conciliation Council.

Schools are required to be open to receive all pupils on the weekday immediately preceding and immediately following each break period covered by this agreement.

https://www.education.ie/en/Circulars-and-Forms/Active-Circulars/cl0005_2020.pdf

Blondini

deiseindublin wrote: »

You think you are more qualified, living outside of the country, never having taught in our system or any system, with no kids in an Irish school?

F*cking incredible, I'm in awe of you.

It looks like one of the opposition has gone rogue!

Even their "teammates" are not thanking the latest posts :pac:




I jest, have a nice weekend everybody.....

Boggles

meeeeh wrote: »

You can't go against public health though, they have to have the authority to tell someone to close or reopen.

Of course you can, our local care home ignored their instructions on allowing visitation and sourced all their own PPE back in March.

No Covid cases. No Covid deaths.

the kelt

Smacruairi wrote: »

I'm sure a humble reassessment of this post is forthcoming in light of the recent claremorris update.

A humble reassessment, are you joking?

Be more along the lines for said poster in their dislike of public sector workers to tell all and sundry they don’t know what they’re talking about.

beggars_bush

The principal should call their bluff.
And hide behind the patron body and INTO in terms of staff and pupil health

deiseindublin

I can only presume that in a small community like that the official word went out online that they're open but the unofficial local rule of thumb is to back the school up by staying at home.

beggars_bush

deiseindublin wrote: »

I can only presume that in a small community like that the official word went out online that they're open but the unofficial local rule of thumb is to back the school up by staying at home.

I hope so

wirelessdude01

harr wrote: »

Primary.. were due to finish at 11 on the 22nd so only one day really. They wouldn’t have been doing anything on the Monday only games and stuff .
They said a day will be made up somewhere along the line .

Be interesting to know if they have sought.and received permission to do this. It's actually two days they need to make up based on the school year of 183 days.

Dempo1

Very strange this closing and then reopening of the school in Mayo. I'd have assumed the principal would have sought approval from the board of management before announcing the closure. Then it transpires public health officials did not advise closure, followed by the board not supporting the move, then a dictate from the department of Education, schoolmust reopen? What the hell is going on here, just extraordinary state of affairs.

It certainly does look like case numbers are very high in such a small community, apparently the highest nationwide, currently, so it seems like the principal was acting out of an abundance of caution and perhaps on general feedback from concerned parents and staff.

Eitherway, not a very reassuring situation, looking from outside in.

History Queen

Dempo1 wrote: »

Very strange this closing and then reopening of the school in Mayo. I'd have assumed the principal would have sought approval from the board of management before announcing the closure. Then it transpires public health officials did not advise closure, followed by the board not supporting the move, then a dictate from the department of Education, schoolmust reopen? What the hell is going on here, just extraordinary state of affairs.

It certainly does look like case numbers are very high in such a small community, apparently the highest nationwide, currently, so it seems like the principal was acting out of an abundance of caution and perhaps on general feedback from concerned parents and staff.

Eitherway, not a very reassuring situation, looking from outside in.

The BOM did support the principal's decision I thought?. Part of his reasoning for closing was the amount of staff self isolating and being unable to recruit subs.

Edit: board did agree with principal, it was the governance section of the Dept of Education that disagreed. See school website with details around decision attached.

http://www.claremorrisboysns.com/445832140

Donald Trump

When I was a child in primary school I remember we would be looking at the weather forecast on the telly if the weather was cold to see whether there might be snow coming in, hoping that we could get an extra day off. Snow or storm or anything really. Just hoping for any excuse for a day off from the classroom.

Dempo1

History Queen wrote: »

The BOM did support the principal's decision I thought?. Part of his reasoning for closing was the amount of staff self isolating and being unable to recruit subs.

I thought initially they did but I saw a report on this on the evening RTE news and they clearly said the board (or goverence, as they put it), did not support the decision to close, this is why I find this situation very, very ODD

I understand the Laois school was actually advised to close by public health.

History Queen

Dempo1 wrote: »

I thought initially they did but I saw a report on this on the evening RTE news and they clearly said the board (or goverence, as they put it), did not support the decision to close, this is why I find this situation very, very ODD

I understand the Laois school was actually advised to close by public health.

The governance section of the Departmemt of Education is not the school's Board of Management. See link i posted abovetp school website explaining issue.