Evidence ‘too weak’ to let schools reopen say teaching unions
CORONAVIRUS: GRIDLOCK IN
TEACHING unions refused to back down in their opposition to schools reopening next month, despite advice that their members were not at a greater risk from Covid-19.
Government scientific advice released yesterday said the “balance of evidence” pointed towards children being less likely to carry the virus than adults.
But the Scientific Advisory Group for Emergencies (Sage) acknowledged that the evidence was “inconclusive”.
The Sage papers suggest that younger teachers’ attendance in schools could be prioritised in order to decrease the likelihood of infection for school staff in more vulnerable age groups.
“Evidence remains inconclusive on both the susceptibility and infectivity of children, but the balance of evidence suggests that both may be lower than in adults,” the Sage document said.
Last month, Professor Viner, of University
Russell College
London, and Dr Rosalind Eggo, of the London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine, said UK clinical data confirmed that children have notably less symptomatic disease and of lower severity than adults.
They said: “Evidence remains inconclusive on both susceptibility and transmissibility of children, but balance of evidence suggesting both may be lower.”
Teaching union leaders last night continued to raise doubts over Boris Johnson’s call for primary schools to begin a phased reopening of classrooms from June 1.
Dr Mary Bousted, joint general secretary of the National Education Union, said: “Sage has only weak evidence as to what extent children can transmit the virus to others.”
She added: “If we cannot be certain about the transmission of the virus – and it appears Sage cannot, either – then it is only right to exercise caution.”
She concluded: “It remains the case that the National Education Union does not yet think it safe for the wider opening of schools.”
Paul Whiteman, general secretary of the headteachers’ union NAHT, said: “Support for a fixed date for school return is vanishing quickly.
“What is needed is local flexibility to determine when it is right for schools to open up to more pupils, informed by evidence of what is happening in their own local area.”
He added: “We all want to see schools back as soon as possible, so NAHT has written to the Secretary of State for Education today as we still need the Government to explain why it has so strongly asserted that a return to school on June 1 is a wise thing to do.
“A robust test, trace and isolate policy is essential if we are to return more pupils to school.”
Jon Richards, head of education at Unison, said: “It makes no sense for ministers to push schools to open more widely in England, while other parts of the UK take a more considered approach.
“It’s time ministers took a step back and delayed any moves increase the number of pupils schools until it’s safer to do so.”
A separate “Independent Sage” group of scientists yesterday claimed June 1 was too early for schools to reopen.
Sir David King, chairman of the independent group, said: “By going ahead with this dangerous decision, the Government is further risking the health of our communities and the likelihood of a second spike.”
The Prime Minister’s spokesman said the Government was “continuing to work closely with teachers, schools and unions” on the plans to in to return children to classrooms. Sage documents also floated the idea of splitting classes into two to reduce classroom numbers for social-distancing purposes, with groups of youngsters attending on alternate weeks.
A document submitted by a subgroup of scientists on Sage warned of the damaging impact on children of keeping them off school.
It said: “A cohort of children have experienced a shock to their education which will persist and affect their educational and work outcomes for the rest of their lives.”