Pupils who refuse to wear face masks will NOT be sent home
New school measures are just guidance, not law, say ministers
‘Parents across Scotland will be angry at this rule’
PUPILS who refuse to put on face masks will not be excluded when wearing the coverings between classes in secondary schools becomes compulsory next week.
Ministers yesterday published guidance confirming that, from Monday, secondary pupils should cover their faces when walking between classrooms.
Nicola Sturgeon refused to rule out extending the measure to cover primary schools – and masks could also become mandatory in secondary school classrooms in the event of local outbreaks.
The new move was announced despite a leading expert warning that forcing children to wear face masks could end up doing more harm than good.
However, the requirement for everyone to wear face coverings in secondary schools is only set out in guidance rather than being written into law – and it states that pupils should not face the threat of being sent home if they refuse to follow the rules.
It comes as official figures show that 10,665 pupils were absent from school last Friday, giving an absence rate of 8.2 per cent.
Absence for coronavirus-related reasons was 1.5 per cent, which is double the figure given by ministers a week ago.
The official guidance published by ministers yesterday states: ‘No one should be excluded from education on the grounds that they are not wearing a face covering.’
Asked how the rules would be policed, Miss Sturgeon said: ‘Schools already have behaviour policies in place, they already try to encourage people to do the right things and dissuade them from doing the wrong things. This is another aspect of that.’
She added: ‘Ideally we don’t want to have an enforcement regime around this kind of guidance in schools and that is why I think it is best dealt with through the normal processes that schools have in place.’
The guidance also states that face coverings ‘should not generally’ be required in classrooms but they may ‘play a particularly important role when prevalence rises’.
It continues: ‘Local incident management teams may recommend a further strengthening of the use of face coverings in other areas of the school (eg classrooms) when dealing with local outbreaks.’
Jo Bisset, organiser for the Us for Them Scotland parents’ group, said: ‘This is a very disappointing move and parents across Scotland will be angry at this new rule.
‘It will impact vulnerable pupils the most and creates another unnecessary challenge for children who’ve already endured months of misery. This is also a slippery slope. Today it’s over-12s in certain areas of school. But parents are worried that will very easily become all areas of the school, including the classroom. And if masks must be worn by those over 12, why not by eight and nine-year-olds?’
Asked if she could rule out face masks in primaries, Miss Sturgeon said: ‘If I stand here and rule out things when we are dealing with an infectious, deadly, virus then every parent in the land should be up in arms and furious at me because that should not be the way any First Minister right now is responsibly doing her job.
‘I’m not a parent myself but I’ve got a niece and nephew at secondary school, so will be affected by this. I know anything to do with children is very emotive and very sensitive. We are trying to take the best decisions we can to keep schools open safely and reduce the risk of transmission of the virus within schools.
‘We are not planning to introduce this guidance that we are introducing as of Monday for secondary schools in primary schools and I hope we don’t need to do that. But equally anybody in my position who stands here and says categorically I will absolutely rule something out... I don’t think any parent would thank me for that.’
Miss Sturgeon repeatedly cited World Health Organisation advice published over the weekend which recommended that children above the age of 12 should wear face coverings. As well as masks being compulsory when moving between classrooms, pupils will also be expected to wear them on school transport.
But Professor Russell Viner, a member of the Scientific Advisory Group for Emergencies, told the BBC’s Newsnight: ‘The evidence on masks is very unclear and actually I think that [making them compulsory in secondary schools] is potentially going beyond the evidence we have. There’s lots of concerns about mask wearing for children, particularly younger children, because they touch their face, they are constantly worried about their mask. ‘It could potentially spread the virus more.’ He said it is ‘not a good idea’ for younger children and ‘we don’t have the evidence that this is useful’ for teenagers. Dr Patrick Roach, general secretary of the NASUWT teaching union, said the announcement ‘runs the risk of causing uncertainty and confusion’.
He said: ‘Where schools are unable to ensure effective social distancing, other measures will need to be introduced to protect health and safety. However, if wearing face masks or face coverings in schools is now deemed appropriate in order to safeguard health and safety, then it is difficult to understand why this practice has not been made compulsory.’
Larry Flanagan, general secretary of the EIS teaching union, said the move was ‘a sensible and appropriate step to reduce the risk of Covid-19 spreading through school communities’.
At Holyrood yesterday, Education Secretary John Swinney said introducing ‘mandatory’ guidance with legal force would be ‘alien to many aspects of the normal working of schools’ and he would instead ‘encourage compliance’.
Scottish Conservative education spokesman Jamie Greene said: ‘John Swinney’s claim that wearing face masks in schools is not mandatory but obligatory guidance is as clear as mud. Parents, pupils and teachers need answers and clarity. They got neither from John Swinney today.’
THEY are common in the Far East but until recently were an unfamiliar sight on our streets.
Now the use of face masks is becoming a matter of habit, first in shops and now in our schools.
Pupils were away from classrooms for so long that they and their parents are desperate to get back to ‘normal’.
Face coverings are a reminder the virus hasn’t gone away, so it’s easy to see why they’re proving so contentious in schools.
There are legitimate fears that if used in class – an option that hasn’t been ruled out – masks will impede learning.
And the science indicates that children are much less likely to catch and spread coronavirus, although the risk is higher for young adults.
As one expert has warned, the use of face coverings may even help to spread Covid19 as children will be more likely to touch their faces while adjusting them.
Another authority, Hugh Pennington, the eminent infections expert, also believes that masks won’t have much impact on virus transmission in schools.
Then there’s the question of how this will be policed and enforced: pupils will not face exclusion or fines.
Instead, staff will have to ensure children are covering their faces in communal areas, or as they move between classes.
Without the threat of sanction, it’s unclear how teachers can be expected to fulfil this duty – yet another responsibility at a time of stressful transition.
Government has a talent for imposing these diktats and then expecting others to get on with implementing them.
Yet every change to the guidance has repercussions for the way schools are run.
South of the Border, ministers are coming under pressure to reverse their presumption against masks in schools.
Meanwhile, the GMB union has called for routine on-site coronavirus testing of school staff in Scotland – a wise proposal that should be seriously considered.
The top priority of ministers, local government and headteachers should be preventing school closures, which would herald a return to chaotic and ineffectual home learning.
Children are resilient and adaptable and most teachers are highly professional. Now more than ever they need more back-up, and consistency, from the Government as they fight to keep Covid-19 out of schools.