Coronavirus (COVID-19)

[renton]

3 minutes ago, Honest_Man#1 said:

Todd has covered why this is a ludicrous point in general, but additionally it has always pissed me off when things like this talk about how they can’t tell if the contacts causing the rise in cases are happening in the classroom or from people travelling in and socialising whilst there etc, as if the two things are completely separate and if it’s actually not happening in the classroom itself that it’s somehow magically nothing to do with schools. They aren’t, and all come under the umbrella of ‘potential for the virus to spread due to schools being open as they currently are’. If schools were moved to blended, the classroom mixing is one thing that’s hugely reduced, but travelling, socialising etc is also reduced, so it’s irrelevant really where the specific location of the spread is occurring.

I guess the point is if the classrooms are not intrinsically to blame for spread, then there is room to enforce other restrictions and guidelines. Masks on all students, all the time, staggered start, break and leave times, different guidelines on pickups and drop offs, subsidised buses with strict bubbles cohorst to and from schools.

All things that could be used to mitigate some risk.

Practically speaking though, none of that is likely to have a high enough compliance to change the risk profile, such that blended learning ends up being the only real solution anyway, yet it does provide some amount of political cover.

The point here is to find enough R everywhere else to keep the schools going, without over loading hospitals and stopping the oldies dying in droves again. Household mixing does drive cases, hospitality does drive cases, schools do drive cases, so its a question of finding the optimal mix of restrictions. It's not been unsuccessful but my concern is how tentative the progress is. I do think blended learning for the older cohorts over December at least is the way to go to add some margin to the R reduction.

[Billy Jean King]

A wee update on this as I keep my beady eye on events.
Inverness play at home today but will have no fans allowed despite being placed in Tier 1 nearly a fortnight ago. They have however been given approval for (from JRG?) 300 fans for their game v Raith in the league.
So still no progress in exceeding the 300 pilot event amount.
Lossiemouth have a friendly today had had said fans would be allowed before subsequently withdrawing that statement and giving no reason why.

Yip the clubs and the SFA are well behind the curve here, seems to be taking them an age to get prepared.

[superbigal]

Wonder what else can be thrown at them ?

 

An outbreak of legionella has been detected in the water supply at two student halls of residence at St Andrews University.

Students living at the £7,000-a-year St Salvator’s Hall and Gannochy House have been told to use bottled water and temporary shower facilities after the bacteria – which can cause the potentially deadly Legionnaires’ disease – was discovered during routine testing earlier this week.

Edited November 14, 2020 by superbigal

[Granny Danger]

There seems to be lots of criticism on here but few solutions.  Is a close down of all educational establishments to, say, mid January the answer?

[Billy Jean King]

Of course it is. If spending a couple of hours in a 'covid secure' venue having dinner and a few drinks is being blamed for the spread, to the extent they were forcibly closed, and now have restrictions on what they can sell along with reduced operating hours, it's ludicrous to suggest spending hours per day in classrooms which are not 'covid secure' is "unproven" and "difficult to establish."

Still not getting it.

Lunch Out / Pint = non essential
Education = essential

No one bar the SG (not even me) is saying school isn't fuelling transmission but it's been deemed a necessary risk worth taking. No idea why a clique on here are so determined to have the SG admit this, in my eyes admission makes little difference as it's the correct policy to pursue. To be honest I wish they would then you guys would be forced to show your real gripe (it really isn't the fact the SG won't admit it's a calculated risk as Todd yet again illustrates beautifully)

In reality school doesn't have that long to go. Courses will be wrapped come Easter and that is 3 x 5 week blocks away with 2 x 2 week breaks which will help.

I love how it keeps you guys frothing though yet you still keep trying to claim it's nothing to do with your inability to go eating and bevvying whilst constantly (like Todd again) making that comparison to blow your argument out the water.

Schools might well go blended at some stage and if they do we will see very little reduction from it.

[Sergeant Wilson]

4 minutes ago, Granny Danger said:

There seems to be lots of criticism on here but few solutions.  Is a close down of all educational establishments to, say, mid January the answer?

I would say so. Extended Christmas holiday from the beginning of December until the end of January. Make up the time later.

[DAFC.]

The world really is a scary place now. Majority of British people wouldn’t take a COVID vaccine once available, according to Sky data. The safest, most effective treatment in humanity’s battle against deadly viruses and yet we still get absolute morons spreading false information about them: that they cause autism being one of the big ones. Morons, every single one of them and this will only mean an extension of lockdown measures as well as more deaths. They moan about lockdown but won’t go with what will uplift it quicker. Absolute moon-howlers.

[Billy Jean King]

I would say so. Extended Christmas holiday from the beginning of December until the end of January. Make up the time later.

I wouldn't be against a policy like that to be honest, basically a "fire break" and enough time as you say to catch up before summer. The example I gave above had curriculum finished by Easter but this on reflection would be better with the year ending nearer the June norm.

[Distant Doonhamer]

The world really is a scary place now. Majority of British people wouldn’t take a COVID vaccine once available, according to Sky data. The safest, most effective treatment in humanity’s battle against deadly viruses and yet we still get absolute morons spreading false information about them: that they cause autism being one of the big ones. Morons, every single one of them and this will only mean an extension of lockdown measures as well as more deaths. They moan about lockdown but won’t go with what will uplift it quicker. Absolute moon-howlers.

The only reasonable assessment of that is that the “Sky Data” is utter shite. There will be many who won’t take the vaccine but they will be vastly outnumbered by those who will. It’s a non story.

[Honest_Man#1]

1 hour ago, Billy Jean King said:

Still not getting it.

Lunch Out / Pint = non essential
Education = essential

No one bar the SG (not even me) is saying school isn't fuelling transmission but it's been deemed a necessary risk worth taking. No idea why a clique on here are so determined to have the SG admit this, in my eyes admission makes little difference as it's the correct policy to pursue. To be honest I wish they would then you guys would be forced to show your real gripe (it really isn't the fact the SG won't admit it's a calculated risk as Todd yet again illustrates beautifully)

In reality school doesn't have that long to go. Courses will be wrapped come Easter and that is 3 x 5 week blocks away with 2 x 2 week breaks which will help.

I love how it keeps you guys frothing though yet you still keep trying to claim it's nothing to do with your inability to go eating and bevvying whilst constantly (like Todd again) making that comparison to blow your argument out the water.

Schools might well go blended at some stage and if they do we will see very little reduction from it.

You really are a smug c**t, with a complete lack of empathy for others. I could live without going to the pub for the next year, but I wonder if the hundreds of thousands (if not millions) of people who are employed in the hospitality industry feel the same. 

[Ron Aldo]

I would say so. Extended Christmas holiday from the beginning of December until the end of January. Make up the time later.

Wouldn't be the worst plan. If a vaccine is on the way and is expected to be rolled out in spring why not swap the Christmas holidays and summer holidays (so basically 6 weeks at Christmas then 2 weeks next summer)?

By the end of the 6 weeks we'll (hopefully) only be a few weeks away from a vaccine. A decison can be made at that point to either fire the schools back as normal or implement a blended model for a few weeks.

[Marshmallo]

Aye try telling the guy who owns a barbers that his business is "non essential" when he can't pay his bills next month 

[RiG]

Let's check in on how "No Lockdown" Sweden is getting on...

 

[The Stig]

44 minutes ago, Honest_Man#1 said:

You really are a smug c**t, with a complete lack of empathy for others. I could live without going to the pub for the next year, but I wonder if the hundreds of thousands (if not millions) of people who are employed in the hospitality industry feel the same. 

These millions are now entitled to furlough and the businesses are getting grants until the end of March when hopefully the vaccine is starting to take effect and the can open back up fully. 

[Scary Bear]

55 minutes ago, Honest_Man#1 said:

You really are a smug c**t, with a complete lack of empathy for others. I could live without going to the pub for the next year, but I wonder if the hundreds of thousands (if not millions) of people who are employed in the hospitality industry feel the same. 

Could always just keep everything open. That would show empathy with everyone.

[Todd_is_God]

2 hours ago, Billy Jean King said:

Still not getting it.

Lunch Out / Pint = non essential
Education = essential
 

Coffee and cake out isn't essential either, but is allowed.

Education is essential, but it's not essential that it takes place in a traditional classroom.

I'm not sure where you get the idea that i'm foaming at the mouth about not being able to go for a pint. I'm perfectly happy to, and capable of, drinking at home. At least there I can listen to music as well.

My main gripe is the utterly inconsistant, arbitrary application of restrictions, and subsequent refusal to consider that the path they are taking may be leading them away from their desired destination, rather than towards it.

Edited November 14, 2020 by Todd_is_God

[Steven W]

3 hours ago, Billy Jean King said:

5 hours ago, Steven W said:

A wee update on this as I keep my beady eye on events.
Inverness play at home today but will have no fans allowed despite being placed in Tier 1 nearly a fortnight ago. They have however been given approval for (from JRG?) 300 fans for their game v Raith in the league.
So still no progress in exceeding the 300 pilot event amount.
Lossiemouth have a friendly today had had said fans would be allowed before subsequently withdrawing that statement and giving no reason why.

Yip the clubs and the SFA are well behind the curve here, seems to be taking them an age to get prepared.

Heels are clearly being dragged. By who, and why I'm not quite sure?

[DeeTillEhDeh]

This is just getting embarrassing now. At least the rest of the gang have slithered off to hide since it’s become indisputably clear that it’s schools driving infection rates, but you can’t help make a further tit of yourself.

You still didn't quote me saying schools were safe.

Still waiting.

[Honest_Man#1]

3 minutes ago, DeeTillEhDeh said:

You still didn't quote me saying schools were safe.

Still waiting.

I don’t recall saying that you said schools were safe. Happy for you to quote me if I did.

[DeeTillEhDeh]

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.bbc.co.uk/news/amp/health-54937486
Full article is here.
https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/healthandsocialcare/conditionsanddiseases/bulletins/coronaviruscovid19infectionsurveypilot/13november2020#age-analysis-of-the-number-of-people-in-england-who-had-covid-19
ONS study that is one or the article sources is here.
It should be noted from the article and ONS study that:
1) they are careful to note that how much transmission is from the classroom is "unproven and difficult to establish" and further that "The review made clear it was not possible to separate contacts in school from contacts around school including travelling to and from, and socialising afterwards."
2) That there was "significant educational, developmental and mental health harms from schools being closed" 
3) That the primary school age positivity rates seem to have plateaued at a lower level, earlier than secondary school kids which seems consistent with earlier data that younger children don't seem to catch it as much.
4) there appears to be no greater risk of catching it as a school teacher as opposed to any other adult group.
5) That there was signs of increase in prevelance in the general population before the schools went back.
Taken together there is enough wiggle room in those conclusions for policy makers to keep the schools going. They can point to increased care in and around schools to avoid mixing - in Scotland tier 3 areas older age kids (16 and over?) Need to wear masks now in classrooms. As well as pointing out that other sectors of society are also responsible and that they can modify those to push down infections.
point 2 is a bit of a strawman, since up here at least the idea would be to use blended learning, but obviously there are doubts as to how effectively the syllabus can be delivered under that mode, and whether you avoid those severe issues highlighted in the report.
from the ONS data, positivity rates in schools have dropped since the English half term, it will be interesting to see if that starts to creep up in the next week again, or whether it has broken enough infection chains to make it harder to re-establish in short time frames.
the idea seems to be that they can find enough R value drops elsewhere to get the virus under control without disrupting the schools. They might not be wrong: R is supposedly, probablistically under 1 now, in Scotland, and test positivity has been slowly dropping to 5.7% in the last day or so. Although several LAs you can clearly see a reduction in decay, and even a rise in the second week of November. 
it does seem likely that they could go to blended learning and break some of the infection chains sooner. Again though, household mixing rules were more severe in large parts of Scotland for longer, so it may be that breaking the chains there is effective enough, if not optimal from a purely public health point of view.
having said that, I do think they should have put the 16+ age groups into blended learning at least until January. They should have been planning for it as soon as it became obvious how easy it was spreading through Uni halls, and they should have put that plan in place over the October break. I was disappointed but not surprised that they didn't. The rest of the school cohort you could leave unaffected and I think, based on the data, that you would reduce the majority of risk.
Blended learning is one of two levers they have left. The other is retail.  Blended learning they would need to roll out nationally. Given that there are real concerns that blended learning would have negative  effects on children's life chances, and given that Covid seems to have a far worse preveleance in higher deprivation areas, and that there is already an educational bias in terms of outcomes vs deprivation, then doing blended learning in the tier system would be likely to only further bake in that bias.
Retail you can modify by tier, and that's basically the tier 4 lever. I am concerned that, despite large changes in shopping behaviour towards online retail, that as we enter into the busiest shopping period of the year, the liklihood of driving large case loads in that sector becomes inevitable unless you can drive base case loads down enough to weather that effect. Given you'd probably need to stay in tier 4 for at least a couple of weeks we are getting near to the point where you can no longer deploy tier 4 without absolutely fucking the retail sector over.
so, tl;dr? I still don't think they should shut schools, and I don't think blended learning is necessary across all age groups. I do think it is desirable for the older groups to go into blended learning, yet they are the cohorts with the most to lose, given they are at the sharp end of their school education. We seem to have a precarious hold on the virus but that won't last unless we do something else quickly to weather Christmas. So it's either modify the schools now, or shut retail for a couple of weeks or both, unless they can get mass testing up here fast, like in Liverpool to find and remove infections quickly.

Personally I'm not convinced by blended learning - like it or not there won't be a substantial difference because pupils will still be mixing in corridors and social areas.

I am more inclined now that if the worst comes to the worst that schools should be closed but not a blanket closure - only those in the worst affected areas and having some sort of provision for the more vulnerable.

I can't talk for other subjects, but we have managed to cover a lot of work in the time we've been back with our senior pupils, particularly with practical subjects.

My biggest gripe right now is waiting on SQA to tell us how we will provide estimates in our curricular area including the necessary assessment materials. If we can get that we could have a substantial amount of assessment under our belts.