Scott Morrison says social distancing rules do not apply to school classrooms
sbs.com.au/news/scott-morrison-says-social-di...
sbs.com.auPosted Apr 24, 2020, 3:49 AM UTC
346374
sbs.com.auIf it doesnt apply in school classrooms, why should it apply anywhere else?
good luck telling kids they cant group up while hanging out outside of school, when they are crammed in together all day in school.
175
[deleted]
47
Yeah, if there's one thing that pisses off teenagers the most, it's blatant double standards/hypocrisy from adults.
23
Give me liberty or give me Death!
20
Why can't kids go see grandparents? Why can't kids go to the playground? Why can't kids go to the shops? What if class is held in any of these places? Are they safe then?
3
It sounds like it's not a requirement because it would be impossible to enforce in the school setting.
1
[removed]
-62
[removed]
26
[removed]
-23
[removed]
6
[removed]
4
[removed]
21
[removed]
-13
[removed]
9
[removed]
9
[removed]
9
[removed]
6
[removed]
1
I'm not sure why he's chosen this hill to die on... Hopefully we luck our way out of this too.
135
Pressure from the business community (donors). They want kids in school so their employees can work.
51
Nah i don't buy that.
How many parents with jobs aren't going to work or aren't working from home, because they have to take care of their kids?
10
I don’t know if kids are stopping parents from working (or at least, working effectively), I’m just saying that business groups think this is happening and are therefore pushing for schools to re-open.
10
[deleted]
8
I can only speak for those who i work with but 3 of our extended team of 15 have gone part time based on decisions to home-school their kids (i.e. not listening to government advice to send children to school).
Kind of helps that business has slowed down anyway but it is happening.
1
I can say with confidence that my colleagues who do have kids are massively hampered by having to balance work and caring.
1
Yes, especially given that he's still yet to answer whether he had his kids in school earlier. He's dodged that question a few times, and the press has not followed up. If he's apprehensive about sending his own children, why is he asking other people to send theirs?
49
Do as I say, not as I do.
13
"do unto others as they do unto you" - truck driver after $1000 fine
2
Hopefully we luck our way out of this too.
The more times we luck out of things, the less we learn and the worse our habits get.
We really shouldn't be hoping for luck, or even happy when we 'get lucky' as a nation. We should be pushing for change.
11
Stubbornness
3
He wants it to spread so we can reach herd immunity sooner in order to ramp up production. They are spreading their bets hoping for elimination whilst aiming for herd immoonity.
3
What worries me is why we haven't had way more spread of the virus, if many of our kids are not testing positive (based on NSW data as advised in the press conference) then how is this aim to be reached through schools?
1
[deleted]
2
Does that not strike you as maybe because the medical advice is actually clear and there is no reason not to?
Morrison is a populist. The easiest thing in the world for him to do would say "keep your kids home until Term 3".
But he hasn't done that. And is burning political capital along the way - why? Because he's confident in the expert advice.
How many in this sub are experts? With the same knowledge and experience as the combined federal and state health departments?
2†
Does it not also strike you as odd that despite everything, the other restrictions are still in place? This "medical advice" has not been explained, in scientific terms. We are not told why that school children are seemingly less hard-hit by the disease. We aren't aware of the implications of exposing children to this virus. A few weeks ago, we simply knew from the mortality rate that younger demographics were less affected. Now, children are developing bruises on their feet. Which is previously unknown. I'm not going to bother you with what-ifs because you don't know the answers.
The safest way of breaking this pandemic is to isolate, and to have volunteers who are both infected and non-infected undergo medical trials to determine what is effective, if anything, to combat this virus.
11
I like your err on the side of caution take here. I agree completely. He has gone back to his initial position which is ambiguous combination of "children are immune"/"children become immunised" there is deliberate vagueness about this
5
It is the deliberate vagueness that doesn't stick when you're talking about science.
I've noticed this about his speeches. He's using a lot of words, hoping that people will not be able to pin him on anything. It's pathetic and a mark of a poor statesman.
3
> Does it not also strike you as odd that despite everything, the other restrictions are still in place? This "medical advice" has not been explained, in scientific terms.
Politicians using scientific terms is a landmine, most have no idea what they mean so using them properly confuses people (e.g. anti-vaxxers, bogans) and using them improperly creates professional criticism (e.g. scientists).
> This "medical advice" has not been explained, in scientific terms. We are not told why that school children are seemingly less hard-hit by the disease.
We don't know why it is, we just know it is. That is also a problem. Nobody can explain it as it doesn't fit but we know it doesn't fit. I'm at a loss when as to what best to do when you have data on a position but can't explain the data.
> The safest way of breaking this pandemic is to isolate, and to have volunteers who are both infected and non-infected undergo medical trials to determine what is effective, if anything, to combat this virus.
Agree, the issue most (every) countries are dealing with at the moment is the definition of "isolate" as complete isolation has massive risks as well. That's what they are seeking.
Nobody knows the answer, and that's what i find scary.
2
If they have no idea what scientific terms mean, then get out a book or have an advisor who has...wait...doe4sn't he stand near a doctor. Presumably he could give the PM information on these things. If the PM gets a question that he can't answer, he should actually say he doesn't know enough about the scientific concept/technology/whatever and refer it to someone who can actually answer the question.
On not being able to explain the data - that is why you trust in science and scientists. You trust them to give you bad news, and for them to not fear retribution for said news.
On the varying definitions of isolation, I agree. All in all, I want to deal with ONE outbreak. I don't want Josh Frydenberg to wet himself, declare the pandemic for Australians to be over, the Jobwhatever payments now stop and everyone goes back to work only for more people to become needlessly infected, where some will die.
As someone once said, do it once, do it right. That saying was with the NBN. I'm not trusting them with the COVID-19 pandemic. I had the president say today that injecting disinfectant might do some good. I think he should try it out first.
2
Surely we can simply measure the viral load in children who share a household with adults who have COVID-19.
If the kids don't test positive then clearly their bodies are able to fight the virus off before it takes hold.
Im sure this has been investigated. The problem with COVID-19 is that we have to act faster than traditional scientific publication processes allow.
1
I wouldn't call him a populist.
1
At the end of the day it’s not up to him or his medical advisors though. Education systems are run by the states and each premier has their own medical advice that they’re acting upon. Victoria have already said online learning for the entirety of term 2
1
Scotty from marketing would only listen to medical advice if it came written on a stack of bills.
1
So how do you explain that he has been following the medical advice from the federal and state health departments?
1
Especially because he can't make up his fucking mind.
Here's the 7 principles we are going to follow.
"Nah fuck it I'm going to speak out about this anyway"
2
Not sure he is dieing on it mate. Australia is doing really well and hopefully will continue to.
2
let kids out of public school classrooms and they might start learning things.
-2
Still want to know what’s driving the desperation to get kids back into Petrie dish classrooms.
97
He also said he wants to see workers back in offices even if they can work from home, he's keen to see things return to "normal". Seemingly ignoring any opportunity to use this as a catalyst for any sort of positive change.
We'll just build more roads so we can all commute to the same place at the same time to do things many of us can do remotely and asynchronously.
78
Why though. If they can be work in offices or at home what difference does it make? Weird none the less.
-8
Because if things become better than 'normal' the Libs are fucked. They've already been forced to play too many cards and they're on thinner ice than a lot of people think. They've given ground on welfare and people are starting to talk about large reforms. The Libs detest this. The longer this situation goes on the more likely it is that their attempts to return to normal get their arses booted out on the street come the next election.
16
Because boomer managers need to micro manage all thier staff all the time and the only way to do work is 5 days a week in a cube farm.
Hopefully there is a massive shift in part time WFH.
16
You got it. My workplace was patting itself on the back today because we’re all still in the office and no one died yet
6
I worked it out. Transurban. More people on the shitways means more money in liberal party branches.
1
Imagine how hard the petrol stations are being hit right now. The government doesn't want a permanent loss in sales when people switch to lower fuel consumption lifestyles.
4
Yeah I worked it out. Transurban.
1
Oh don't worry I'm 100% with you. The 'reason' is mostly fear.
From an economic point of view they would argue that CBD businesses like coffee shops would be crippled by long-term WFH. What's missing from that statement though is it's a great opportunity to have more small businesses closer to homes instead of lumped together in a concrete jungle.
Yeah I'd miss socialising in person with my coworkers but I would be able to socialise with my neighbours at my local coffee shop. Hell I might even get to know the names of more than 2 of them.
2
That’s actually a good way of putting it. 👍 scum economies that survive from the swill off of suit scum floating around in heavily populated commercial areas.
1
Got to wrap up and cut off job keeper ASAP, economy something something.
25
Kids in class means the parent/s can work.
12
If that was the only reason, they'd tell year 9s and older to stay home.
7
They told people to stay home.. and yet they still had to close the beaches.
They also know that telling kids and teens to maintain a distance is futile. The government actually said before the schools were closed that they wanted people to stay at work and parents needed the kids to be able to to go to school, so yes that's what it is, scummo himself said it.
-1†
Na it’s more than that. That’s a simple communicable message, something else is underpinning this.
6
I feel like the way he says it, he sees it as a slogan for the next election. 'I stopped the boats', 'I kept the schools open'. He is a marketing man at heart. Assuming he has one.
11
The government actually said before the schools were closed that they wanted people to stay at work and parents needed the kids to be able to to go to school, so yes that's what it is, scummo himself said it.
1
No they can't say that because it means they are putting the economy above students and teachers health.
1
A friend suggested that maybe it’s to expose the kids to the virus at a young age so they can get immune to it before they’re adults where they have greater chance of serious complications. Interesting theory.
2
Interestingly stupid.
1
It should be fairly obvious.
0
[deleted]
-2†
Because most children are asymptomatic.
If mum or dad at home is sick, then little Johnny has the bug - whether he shows symptoms or not. He then passes it on to Timmy, who also shows no signs, but gives it to Nan and bye bye Nan.
11
Fairly simple really, If the kids miss enough school, say for the entire 6+ months this will be ongoing, we have an entire year that will probably need to be repeated. Either that, or they invest large amounts in to a broad distance education system that may cause long term disruption as people realise just how horrible most of the 'education' children in schools are receiving these days.
What they really do not want to happen is that parents find long term means of keeping their children home and educating them, because god help them if it comes out in a year or two that the kids who were 'homeschooled' have better education outcomes than those in institutional learning environments and their whole system comes tumbling down around them.
In this day and age the idea of 'schools' as anything other than glorified childcare centers and indoctrination centers is laughable. We have access to on demand video for lessons, instant communication with experts in every field imaginable and the ability to provide an education to our children that far outstrips anything a school environment could provide.
But if we do not teach those public school kids 'the right things' then they may get uppity ideas about wanting to go to university instead of going to work in one of the minimum wage jobs... So schools must stay open!
-7†
This is the perfect example of why ok boomer exists
33
Really? You think Boomers support home-schooling more than GenX or younger?
Homeschooling has been increasing for several decades; unfortunately I couldn't find anything that went back further than the late 90s and then only for America: https://hslda.org/content/docs/news/2019/20191001-federal-report-homeschooling-doubled-in-last-20-years.aspx * There's a variety of other reports over shorter periods if you want to look it up, for example https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-42624220
The late 90s would have been around when the last of the Boomers' kids would have been been in highschool. (1999 - 18 years = 1981 - 30 = 1951; just before the middle of the Boomer years)
- According to that report between 1999 and 2016 number of American homeschooling families increase by roughly 100%, while population increased by about 16% (https://www.multpl.com/united-states-population/table/by-year)
2
More so labelling schools as glorified childcare and indoctrination centres. There was some valid points in their post but that paragraph is absolutely laughable
8
Wipe that smashed avo out of your eyes and learn to read before resorting to 'ok boomer'.
-9
Are you advocating that everyone homeschools? As if in a normal circumstance where we aren't working from home that people will have time to work and then come home and teach their children. Or are you saying that experts will just be on hand at all times for children to reach out to and answer their menial questions.
10
I read indoctrination centre and had flashbacks to reading any comment on a Sky News article
10
I mean can you give us one reason why we should attempt to engage in good faith conversation with you? You're basically just parroting the same old right-wing talking points about education and clearly know nothing about what actually goes on in education. Why should we waste our energy talking to someone who has clearly made up their mind already on something they know nothing about?
5
Fairly simple really, If the kids miss enough school, say for the entire 6+ months this will be ongoing, we have an entire year that will probably need to be repeated.
John Hattie tells you to go and get fucked
14
This post deserves more upvotes. The link is great.
2
Why are you being down voted?
It's a pretty common idea that right wing government don't like supporting public services and definitely do not like people becoming educated.
7
In this day and age the idea of 'schools' as anything other than glorified childcare centers and indoctrination centers is laughable.
Unless there’s some serious satire going on there, I didn’t interpret that as the poster saying what governments thought but as what they themselves thought
6
But if you wanted to keep the masses stupid wouldn't that be what you would do, lower the standards of the education system that clearly doesn't put too much effort into the political landscape of this country and has a huge hit and miss reputation of financial education?
My og comment about this being a right wing tactic isn't too far a stretch when you compare it to other countries, especially the US where our Administration seems to enjoy following quite closely in providing minimal for the public and privitizing as much as possible.
2
Really?
I thought right wing governments wanted just the right level of education to ensure the working class can develop the basic skills required for greedy big businesses to employ them on minimum wage and then keep all the profits for themselves.
But not too much education so that people realise they are being conned and rise up, rebel and claim the profits for themselves.
4
Yeah that's exactly my thoughts, isn't that what our public education system is now? The longer kids are out of school the less the brain washing continues and private schools can't keep training the next lot of ALP and Nationals voters.
Parents are wanted to go back to work so that private businesses can keep making profits and the stock market will keep on churning.
(These are entirely personal beliefs)
3
/s? Probably the stupidest thing I’ve ever read if not.
1
This is dangerous on many levels. One of them being that children can contract and die from the virus, another being we don't know the long term effects it will have on children. It seems crazy that he's just risking this, how can the medical advice condone this?
82
It is less that the medical advice condones it, and more that there is not enough solid data yet to 'prove' that schools are a risk. So without the data, they can simply say 'medical advice is that schools are not a risk' and it is factually true because there has not been enough time to collect the rigorous amounts of data needed to show a definite correlation.
This is probably a result of the mismatch in 'political thinking' and 'scientific thinking' that has resulted in the doctors saying 'we have no evidence of schools being a risk' and the politicians taking that to mean 'schools are not a risk'.
45
[deleted]
21
Because it is not a flu?
6†
It's much worse than a flu
17
It's a subtle difference, but I think all that can be said is 'There isn't strong evidence that schools are a risk'. It's very different from 'Schools aren't a risk'. Not having certainty about something doesn't make the opposite true.
16
Well put, definitely makes sense
1
Medical advice = advice from someone with a medicine background that works for us at the moment
1
There is (limited) evidence that children may not transmit COVID-19 to the same degree as other respiratory illnesses. For example, this case study found that a child who tested positive for COVID-19 did not pass it on to any of the ~170 contacts they came into contact with at school. They were also infected with a cold virus and influenza, which they did pass on. As they state in the abstract:
"The fact that an infected child did not transmit the disease despite close interactions within schools suggests potential different transmission dynamics in children."
There are also other infectious disease experts who indicate that children do not seem to spread COVID-19 as much as adults, such as Dr. Collignon at my own university (link). However, I'm not familiar with the body of evidence they use to arrive at that conclusion.
Finally, I think there are concerns that during remote learning children are more likely to be out and about in the community, particularly older children/teenagers, whereas at least with schools they can carry out contact tracing more easily. Again, I don't have a particular view on that, though I'd hope that parents would be responsible enough to keep kids within the house during this period.
I don't say any of this to agree with government's statements; my own partner works a lot with schools and is very concerned about how many kids are being packed in together. At the very least they could spread them out to reduce any risk. But there does seem to be some medical backing behind the idea that schools are generally safe, we'll just have to wait and see whether they're correct.
18
I know you said limited.
But from your statement that is a sample size of one. The problem is because kids get less sick we don't test them nearly as much. Until we do almost universal testing it won't be clear if they are asymptomatic spreaders.
It's good they are more resistant to the effects, I would also suggest this would lower their R0 infection rate. However an R0 of 1.5 or 2 could still be problematic.
Also then you have the problem of parents congregating at school gates. These parents going back home etc.
I mean, we may have no other choice but to open schools and test it out. I understand why teachers are concerned though, they feel like ginuea pigs with no PPE.
What I really dislike is teachers being villified for expressing concerns. You didn't do this, but what I have seen on certain news site has been horrific.
12
found that a child
That's an anecdote.
6
Dont start giving out the medical facts that are driving the governments descisions, its pointless here no matter how tentitively you put it (which you are really trying hard to be, which is cute but in the end probably pointless - these views are hard-wired political ones).
-15
"Victorian Premier Daniel Andrews has warned that fully re-opening schools would only spread the virus with tens of thousands of families having to move around the state to pick-up and drop-off children"
Once again Dan Andrews shows us where the real leadership is in Australia.
The LNP are attacking the teacher's legitimate safety concerns as a Union picket. What the fuck is wrong with these idiots?
And then the article nicely puts a tweet from Peter "Loveboat" Dutton attacking Qld education as a union picket, when the biggest influx of infections came from a failing of his Border Force who couldn't even quarantine passengers disembarking a ship.
Something authorities in 1800s managed to do successfully.
What a failure.
78
I'm glad that I live in Victoria at this point. Andrews isn't allowing us to be turned into an insane test for Morrison's economy. I'd hope other states would follow Andrews on this and not take the risk, but even if they don't at least his actions will help to suppress any reemergence of the virus in Victoria.
34
Should be glad to be in Victoria. Wish I was! I’m in South Australia. With two days notice (during the school holidays mind you) we’ve had to change from expecting high levels of students staying home and with this prepared for online learning to schools fully open and all kids encouraged to return on Monday. To say teachers are pissed would be an understatement. To add salt to the wounds, we had the last 4 days of term 1 as student free days to prepare for this new online learning with many staff continuing this prep in their holidays. Much of this will be wasted now and teachers needing to now prepare for face-to-face AND at home learning for the kids the parents choose to keep home. Guess what many have spent the remaining few days of their holidays (and weekend no-doubt) doing? Morale was low at the end of term 1, I’m so worried about how we’re going to go in term 2. Worried about my colleagues mental health, energy and of course physical health.
All that said, I’d hate to be the ones making these decisions. I’m sure it is tough on all involved and no-doubt they believe in the decisions they’re making for the greater good. Clearly not everyone is going to agree.
9
That's what lack of leadership looks like.
Decisions on the run, ubrupt changes in direction with little notice.
That is how timid cowards make decisions, doing whatever they think will attract the least criticism, rather than following a careful and considered course of action not matter what people say.
1
Dan is pretty good
2
Yeah, I was very concerned about how teachers were getting absolutely pummeled in the comments on sites like news.com and the dailymail. It's like worrying about your safety and that of your family is some disgusting act to them.
Teachers are highly unionised, which is a smart idea at all times in my opinion.
8
Due to necessity.
Teachers are paid as low as they can get away with and any request to better conditions for teachers is met with society wide "they get how much time off a year and they want X as well?".
Teachers would be under the poverty line without their union
2
So true.
2
You forgot this bit
"Victorian Premier Daniel Andrews,It's perfectly fine to send your kids to school if you can't have them learning from home, but if you can have the kids learning from home they must learn from home."
And.
The state of emergency in Victoria is due to expire on May 11 and authorities will set about removing social distancing restrictions in a "very thoughtful and careful way", Health Minister Jenny Mikakos said on Saturday.
And.
"New South Wales announced plans this week to return to face-to-face teaching in a staggered fashion from 11 May."
7
New South Wales announced plans this week to return to face-to-face teaching in a staggered fashion from 11 May."
It should be noted their staggered fashion as stated by the NSW premier is stupid and seems to be more about marking kids off a roll, than it is maintaining any sense of consistent teaching.
'Please try and organise it so that students with siblings can attend on the same day"
If we tried to do that at our school we would end up running 60%+ of classes. Every single one of my classes has a sibling can be daisy chained together. My 11's link to one group of my 9's, who link to my 8's, who link to my other 9's who link up to me 12's who then link down to my 7's.
And bam if one on my classes goes back. They all need to go back, except that there's 24 other students in each of those classes who link off to other students, who would link off to other students again.
It should simply be a year level based system, where based on the schools population they assign a day of the week to the year level. And then the next week they shuffle the days down and run a normal time table.
The biggest issue with all this is the actual vulnerable people(The teachers) still all need to be onsite for the 5 days of the week in order to make contact with their classes and teach them properly.
As a result you have now increased the actual harmful overlap as those teachers will be moving from room to room, desk to deak, if one of them is infected, they cough over the desk in room 20, and then the next teacher in room 20 get's sick, and the next day they are spreading it in room 10.
And you could restrict teacher movement. But the teacher who needs to teach science and maths, but has been given a non science room for the day, their science classes don't get to do practical work. Or alternatively if they get a science room for their one science class that day, everyone elses science classes don't.
I want to go back to teaching at school(Liking the lack of a commute). But the current plans that people are putting out there aren't being made for the benefit's of the kids. Because they continue to come with operational caveats that ensure that we are sacrificing classroom structure, just for the sake of having kids in the building.
The comparison for a workplace would be
"Hey guys I all want you to come to work today in the restuarant, however due to social distancing only 2 of the 6 of you can be in the kitchen at any one point in time. So 4 of you are just going to sit outside in the dining area."
Unless we are going back to school, running the school as it would have without COVID, and forcing every parent to send their child to school. Then the discussion is moot.
Because at the moment I have 100% attendance to my remote classes, I literally have kids who are school refusers that I haven't seen once this year in the flesh coming into my lessons and interacting.
If we go back to school and have 50% attendance rates, I'm not going to be able to cater to those at home and those at school unless I teach the lessons like I am currently from home.
And that assumes that classes don't get collapsed due to teacher absences as well.
11
[deleted]
1
Okay. Sounds more sensible. But still running with this rubbish assumption that the contagion can only spread by adults contacting other adults. It does not matter if the kids leave their home by themselves and return by themselves entering a high school of 1000+ other HUMANS and then returning home is increasing chance of transmission by at 100%+. yet as adults the same 4 people can't go to someone's house every afternoon for a couple of beers or a wrestle.
3
What the fuck is wrong with these idiots?
to fascists, teachers are a 'enemy class'.
3
Goddamn, right wingers just hate educators and education so damn much.
They killed TAFE, have almost killed unis, now they're homing in on primary and secondary.
They won't be happy until kinder is like that Kamp Krusty episode of the Simpsons where all the children are making wallets for sale.
68
uneducated people vote for them more often, so it makes sense i guess?
42
"I love the poorly educated" - Donald Trump
17
Conservatism has a couple of reliable bases.
- The elderly due to a resistance to change.
- The poorly educated who generally respond better to fear tactics, this has been studied and conservatives are more driven by this. So they are also resistant to change.
- The economically successful, because of conservative tax policy they actually vote in their self interest.
That is my .02 and while I can point to studies to back this up. I won't claim this is universally true. There are too many uninformed voters to make too much sense of our political system.
6
The attitudes towards schools has had me floored for weeks.
Schools are incredibly germy at the best of times. In the last week of term one a year 6 child attended the school where I work with a wet cough and streaming nose. No-one thought the need to send her home (even as she was wiping her nose on her sleeve) because she was a teacher’s child. So even though the policy is to send any child home who appears sick, it doesn’t always happen.
And as for the younger children...they are often picking noses, wobbling teeth with their fingers and I have witnessed many who don’t wash their hands after using the bathroom. A lot of them don’t know how to blow their noses or cover their mouths when they cough or sneeze. It’s just the nature of young children.
And the supply of soap, disinfectant and general cleaning products has been woefully inadequate.
I am interested to know where the government get the data from that proves schools are safe.
46
kids literally have games where they cough on each other then laugh that the have the rona.
With this happening as we come into winter its going to result in huge increases again
32
The kids in my class last year played a game where they picked their finger and then tried to ‘tag’ each other. 🤦♀️
7
I know, right? It’s a great big joke to them!
6
cough Marist College cough
3
[deleted]
2
Marist College NZ this is where they got their data that schools are safe because this wasn't in Australia, therefore Australian schools are safe
9
Less than 10 students from a cluster of 93 at the school. Probably in contributing to their thinking that the risk at schools is from infected teachers, not students.
1
Scummo: school is safe, parents should send their kids to school, no need for social distancing.
Also Scummo: my kids are being schooled at home.
38
I’d be interested to see if HIS kids actually go back to school?
10
Won't matter because it won't be reported or talked about. All through the initial days of the crisis before school closures, when people were crying out for weeks for the schools to be closed, and scotty said it was fine and kids should go to school, he had his own kids at home.
23
It will be reported. Because Morrison has lied about it several times, and thus it's something journalists will bring up.
8
I hope so, but I don't have a lot of faith in the mass australian media.
On the plus side the independent media seems to be getting a lot more recognition and spotlight.
11
I'd be interested to see if his kids actually go back to a typical public school. FTFY.
3
It's a private school, but not a real elite fancy one. Pretty close to a typical public school, I went to the same one myself.
6
Interesting. Still a different demographic than faced at some schools I imagine but point taken.
2
He has already stated that his kids will go back to school.
2
[deleted]
3
He said his kids will go back to school when they teach normal content (not online delivery content). He said this a week or two ago
2
Absolutely ridiculous, it’ll take a death of a teacher directly linked to school transmission before anything changes and even then I doubt it. Sacrificial lambs of the economy.
32
Any cases linked to schools?
8
Marist College NZ it's not Australia but they're not that different over the ditch, we'e just been lucky
10
I was thinking about that exact example, it's clear SARS-COV-2 can spread in schools. I never thought otherwise.
I remember I was on prac last year and 1/4 of the first year students were out at the end of my prac from the flu.
3
Yeah each school has its own little germ climate. You get really sick in your first year of teaching, then you'll get sick again when you move schools.
2
4
Did they spread it to the class or teachers or was it a few cases?
2
I don’t believe so, the schools closed as soon as it was announced. It was in early March.
5
If There was a cluster of school students or teachers who contracted the virus at a school the media would have been all over it.
2
There were 80+ cases in the cluster at Marist and it was the worst on the North island. It was staff, students and parents but I don't think details are available to the public on how it was transmitted or how many students got it. I think it was about a dozen staff from memory.
Most places prioritised school closures. I think schools and pubs were closed before anything in Ireland. So it is a bit hard to find info. Obviously 60+ school staff dead in NYC but we don't know if kids played any role.
1
There’s been a few schools closed in SA for a short period (less than a week) to allow disinfection after students tested positive.
1
From the very beginning, the school classrooms (and child care centres) have been the battleground between treating this as a health issue or an economic one
As things go on longer, it's just becoming more blatant and Scotty from Marketing is willing to chance it that, because of low rates of community transmission, transmission within schools won't be an issue
He might be right. Or he might not.
But since parliament's closed down for months, and his daughters are staying home (and he keeps lying about what his daughters are doing), he's making it clear he's prepared to gamble with everyone else's safety, but not his own.
32
Your 2nd paragraph is bang on. The strategic part of it is that if a given school becomes a spreader their families will all be in a small area. The unstrategic part is that they will then go home and spread to their families and we live in an era of a mobile workforce. Clearly these ideas are conjured up by people who work from home.
Edit: wehave such low numbers an outbreak like this is highly unlikely but that also shows how hollow this selective unrestricting is.
4
My fiance is the principal of a small country primary school.
That Scotty from Marketing is prepared to risk her life, the lives of her staff, and that of their families, does not impress.
5
For what it's worth they are safer than police officers in an emergency lane. Our numbers are miniscule. The main issue is the double standard shows something dodgy.
0
Chief medical officer Brendan Murphy said on Friday there was no evidence of significant transmission amongst children in schools.
Just like the experts in WHO were saying earlier, there is no evidence of human to human transmission, then next thing you know.....
"So we think the community risk of having children together in a classroom is low," Dr Murphy said.
So we are supposed to believe and act based that on a "thought bubble"?
"Most children who have contracted the virus in Australia have contracted it in the family home. They have not contracted it in the school environment."
Duh......
I am with Daniel Andrew, keep your kids at home, learn at home when you can.
28
So who should be be listening to if not the government, and the WHO?
2
To common sense of course. Right now it's Daniel Andrew not Scomo. I will never listen to a cunt who fuck off to Hawaii while the country burns.
Another good example is on the other side of the Atlantic, where a certain orange man in Govt telling people to liberate their town and cities during a full blown pandemic.
24
That's nothing but meaningless whataboutism.
Morrison did wrong during the bushfires. But is that any reason to say he can't learn from his mistakes? Is that any reason to say that what he's doing now is not right?
It is a non-sequitur to say "Morrison is wrong on COVID because he went to Hawaii on holiday".
-5
Right now it's Daniel Andrew not Scomo
So what Morrison is telling people to do? He's been pretty clear on listening to the instructions from state leaders on education as it's their responsibility.
-9
Except, he's been telling people the opposite for the most part, and challenging the states right to tell kids to stay home.
15
This guy is a fucking idiot. Should have stayed in Hawaii. Cunt
19
Can we send him there by boat?
3
Make the cunt swim.
3
Send him there on the ruby princess
3
Let him take his entire party with him. Including the states and territories.
1
Appearantly,the proof that there is little transmission through schools is that we have not seen transmission through schools during isolation. I note that we also have not seen transmission through pubs during isolation either. Open the pubs.
17
Fair point there.
Funny to think how the logic can be extended.
4
Wonder if that would ring true if they actually tested people with symptoms back in the beginning
1
So school kids can go to Bondi beach then lol
14
parks arent even open
6
It's true, why keep playgrounds closed?
1
Hey Guys. Scomo here. In light of the fact that children are safe, we have decided to mobilise a child labour force! In order to preserve the surplus, we are committed to ensuring the economy is stimulated.
Your child may be required to work in factories and farms.
Social distancing however still applies, and your ‘safe’ children will not be able to see their grandparents or play in parks.
Again, we are committed to the future of the Australian economy.
Scomo.
14
damn kids taking our jerbs
8
Your child may be required to work in factories and farms.
They will produce 1 Pickaxe each and then will start mining coal.
3
Just attacking one of the biggest unions in Australia. Bio-warfare.
14
More people should be unionised, for all their problems they are a powerful force for workers rights.
4
Over 70 people in the New York City department of education have died of Coronavirus.
And that’s only the public schools.
13
70 people so far, and that doesn't include any that died of related symptoms does it?
13
It does not
Teachers are absolutely at risk, like at least be honest about social distancing.
13
plus its not just schools, if kids are back at school, workplaces are going to go back, meaning more people in enclosed spaces, and more people who wonder why they even bother social distancing when they are crammed in with others all day anyway, it will quickly lead to more cases
8
You don't take your car to Mc Donalds to be repaired, don't take medical advice from politicians.
13
[deleted]
0
Who is also in a political position.
4
Seriously shit take here from scovid
12
‘You can’t hang out with four of your mates on the weekend, it’s not safe - but it’s perfectly safe of thirty of you to be in maths class together’.
I’m currently halfway through a Masters of Teaching and considering deferring it for a year. They won’t be happy until teachers start dying of this thing.
It's very hard to get a job teaching straight out of uni, at best you will pick up casual work for a few years or temp contracts, so i don't think deferring will really help that much, you wont be fulltime in schools till it hopefully is dying down a bit
No it’s more the two seven week placements I have coming up, the first is scheduled for the beginning of term three. I feel really uneasy about that, and the uni has said if the schools are open they are going ahead.
fair enough, plus you want to make a good impression, as prac schools are a good place to get casual work once you graduate, and that will be harder while everyone is stressed over coronavirus.
Exactly - I'm training in HSIE/English for secondary schools, and I had an observation placement as this was all heating up for a week. I doubt anyone even remembers my name given how on edge the whole situation was.
What about all of the retail workers
What about them? This is a thread specifically about schools?
[deleted]
I have seen many retailers provide their staff with PPE and respect social distancing guidelines.
I feel sorry for medical workers, they need the best PPE we can get our hands on.
This really isn't true for a lot of people, especially maths teachers. As long as you aren't refusing to work anywhere but a selective school and you don't come across as a nut case, you shouldn't be casual for a few years.
Edit: the poster is not a maths teacher but I feel that he still shouldn't be looking at years of casual work.
yeah maths teachers are typically pretty easy jobs to get, male teachers also have a bigger advantage.
It can be years before others get jobs, and its not a unique situation
I’m not sure why the myth about male teachers having a comparative advantage persists.
Speaking from the perspective of the NSW public system, this isn’t a thing. I have sat on a shitload (actual measurement) of staffing panels and the gender of the applicants has never been a consideration.
I can’t speak for the practices of catholic systemic schools or any independent schools, but if you come across actual examples of this happening it violates the state’s anti-discrimination laws.
Okay, i'll bite. Why do male teachers have a bigger advantage?
This is completely false. It's very easy to get a full-time teaching job, it's just not in capital cities where people want to to teach.
I applied for rural schools straight out of uni and had five schools offer me a job in 12 hours.
Yes there are plenty of rural and remote schools (primary and secondary) that are desperate for teachers.
they dont hire unless people live nearby, they dont want teachers to jump in then leave because of the country change
That is my backup, I have no children or other serious commitments and I have heard it can be quite an experience.
It can be. I learnt a lot, gained experience and met great people. Like someone else said though, it can be very tough if you find the isolation difficult.
It’s a really good way to fast track to more senior roles and save a bit of cash.
High School or Primary?
High school for me, but the primary schools in the area were just as desperate.
Rural schools will not offer a position unless you live close by, as they have been burned many many times by people taking a job, then quitting 3 months in when they move out west.
Moving out rural, especially if you have a family isnt feasable for a lot of people. Even an hour or so out of sydney is still overloaded with teachers in some subjects
I don't agree with the first point. I moved 1000km for mine, although thats QLD. Is that a rule in NSW?
The second point I agree with though. It's not for everyone and isn't possible for some. But there are plenty of full-time jobs out there for firsties. And if you're a early-twenties firsty straight out of uni I can't recommend rural service more.
Not really. Qld has a shortage actually.
depends what sort of teacher you are, primary is a lot easier/more in demand
[deleted]
yeah and thats probably around average, not even long term...
they cant offer you 4 years continuously at the same school. Was she looking actively for ongoing?
Learn a language and/or go rural and you'll have a job straight out of uni.
Unfortunately, I have never been particularly good with foreign languages. Going rural is an option that I am contemplating upon completion.
Oh, unfortunately we know that it'll likely be substitute teaching, country work or at best (arguably) yearly contracts. Can't say I love this trend.
Yeah, nah. It's only difficult if you have a stream that's oversupplied, or you want to work in major city.
Hell you go rural these days and they'll pay you a bonus in certain states.
I don’t know many people that didn’t get a job straight out (Graduated 2018). We are down 7 teachers at my school right now. Most schools are desperate for teachers.
This is my second year of high school teaching, and none of my friends or I had any trouble getting work.
[deleted]
Or consider not teaching in a capital city u/Timbo85
One of the perks of teaching is you get paid the same whether you're paying rent in an inner suburb or an hour or two from the CBD. Plus no congestion, less stress, more space... Add that some schools in the country are screaming for teachers. Win, win, win.
Oh, I live regionally - I’m more than happy to teach in the country!
Easy peasy. Done deal :-)
Gonna disagree here, I and a lot of my cohort got into work within 6 months and all of us were at least casually employed 3 days a week (or permanent casual for a term or 2)
There is no reason not to finish and just pick up casual teaching.
[deleted]
you have to have hard domestic evidence of the risk before you can mitigate the risk... apparently
I can't help but feel like this is payback from the libs over teachers helping students with climate change protests.
Yep and my anxiety is off the charts making my mental health ⬇️⬇️ and after floating the idea of working from home, sent me a long list of things I would need to do and reminding me that ultimately it's his decision... Also state education doesn't have good enough systems to teach effectively online. Clusterfuck.
[deleted]
This is my exact situation.
Also halfway through the same Masters. I intend to push through, but I'll have to isolate myself from my elderly grandparents.
It’s all we can do right?
I’ve told my folks - who have illness that make them immune compromised- that I can’t see them for a while if I go into schools.
I have told my grandparents the same. The stubborn fools refuse to hear it.
[deleted]
Congratulations for this comment. It has got to the point where the infection numbers are known to be so small so he can arbitrarily make these cutoffs and appear wise. A thunderbolt in one hand and a shepherds crook in the other. If we had higher penetration through the population all the social distancing and adults not socialising the schools would have been a great contagion spreader. Obviously not at the scale of cruise ships and hospitals but those huge numbers of kids in one place. Did anybody every tell people to stop using bubblers?
Is everyone here wilfully ignorant? Selective hearing?
He has reiterated the science which states kids are not at the same risk.
This whole thread is a waste of electrons
The kids may not be but they can be carriers.
How will that go for a 60 year old science teacher who doesn’t have to socially distance from them?
Pretty sure they've said if teachers and staff are in an at-risk group they should stay at home.
And yet they've closed public playgrounds.
Schools double as child minding during the day when guardians work, playgrounds do not provide this function.
Playgrounds are where small groups of people gather. Schools are where large groups of people gather, adults and children. If the smaller one is deemed unsafe, the larger one can't be much better.
You mean the 'medical advice'. There are no papers or research or references to success in other countries or trials. Just 'medical advice indicates'. You take that at face value and think everyone else is a waste of electrons? Your dendrites are so shrivelled you couldn't string a shoelace.
Check the graphs, adjusted for population 2-12 year olds have some of the lowest infection rates by a wide margin. The science is correct.
What about all the kids past grade 7? You know, high school. And infection rates are bogus because they are based on testing. What 2 - 12 year olds met the criteria for testing of travelling overseas or being in direct contact with a confirmed case? Look at the death statistics in other countries at an estimation of 3% of the infected rather than 'out of the 20000 tested, 100 were under 12'.
And who gives a fuck about those kids that have already died to the virus, they had it coming? Are you mental?