Schools and the pandemic a year on

Health and Social Care, business and education. Along with the vaccine, these are the three big stories from the pandemic. Behind them lie probably close to 150,000 deaths; each one a tragedy for a family and friends. As befits a blog about education, I will concentrate on my thoughts of what has taken place in education since last March.

Cooperation can be better than competition

Not all expertise resides in one place, and fighting a pandemic is best achieved with teamwork.  Sadly, the government didn’t harness the expertise contained in bodies such as the professional associations. The worst example was probably the announcement that schools would open in January only to be rapidly changed a day later. The on-going saga over assessment is another example of unreal assumptions leading to damaging changes.

Technology finally caught up with schooling or teaching discovered technology

It has taken a pandemic to challenge the existing format of teaching and learning. The technology revolution has impacted on many areas of life over the past half century, since email and the internet entered our lives. However, the resistance of the school sector as a whole to embrace new technology in a systematic manner beyond just installing bits of kit, such as whiteboards, led to there being no road map for when schools were forced to close.

The closure and lack of foresight revealed another problem that has always been there, but had disappeared under the carpet in the past two decades

The deprivation gap

The National Funding Formula marked the low point in recognising that not all children have access to equal opportunities in life. In the 1970s this issue was a hot topic. Books such as, ‘Depriving the Deprived’’ ‘The poverty of education’ and ‘Planning and Educational Inequality’ are worth revisiting as is the section of the Plowden Report that deals with the issue. Despite Labour’s Education Action Zones and the Conservatives’ Opportunity Areas, little real attention has been paid to the lack of education progress linked to deprivation except by a few individuals, such as the work of Professor Dorling, until the pandemic exposed the gaps in society.

The fact that it took a footballer to motivate a government over the issue of free school meals was an indictment of a school system where responsibility for the system was concentrated at Westminster.

The importance of place in local decision-making

It has taken the pandemic to make clear that local decision-making can deal with local issues far better than long chains of command. The current dual system of academies and maintained schools doesn’t work. Either nationalise schools and create the education equivalent of the NHS, with little democratic accountability or return to a system where local democracy has a central role to play in the local school system.

Schooling is still a people-driven activity

Schools never closed, and most school leaders found themselves running two systems for learners: on-line and face to face. Early in the pandemic a headteacher in Cumbria died with covid.  Without committed staff, backed by parents, schooling an unhappily fail to meet educational goals. There is a task to be done in areas where parents are not engaged with schooling to encourage a change of attitude.

And above all

Schools Matter

Children are eager to return to school. In these days of small families – by historical standards – and less community involvement than in the past, schools undoubtedly play a significant social role in the lives of children and young people. I am sure that looking at families where siblings of one parent have attended school as children of key workers and those of another have not been in school for most of the past year will show up the differences in outcomes both intellectual and socially.

Finally, all schools rely upon dedicated and hard-working staff. This blog wants to thank each and every one of you for what you do for children and young people.

Covid and the Teacher Labour Market in England

We now have data from twelve months that have suffered from the effects of the covd-19 pandemic. First thing this morning, I asked my analysts at TeachVac what had been the consequences for the teacher labour market in England. They came up with the following table for all vacancies.

2018201920202021
March715990299302
April813187356080
May10170114686357
June386248283286
July93312941043
August547565543
September295538843382
October418654383721
November366242583074
December201528931811
January5492638682162622
February5056579184215167
Monthly recorded vacancies for teachers in England

Source: TeachVac www.teachvac.co.uk

Secondary teachers have suffered from a greater decline in their job opportunities than their primary colleagues. However, with the modern equivalent of ‘pool’ recruitment still in operation in parts of the primary sector, the figures are less reliable for that sector the for the secondary school sector where most schools manage their own recruitment.

Details data for local authority vacancy patterns and even those for a specific postcode are available on request, for a small fee. Data are also available for specific secondary subjects on a month by month basis, again for a small fee.

The next two months will be key ones for teachers looking for jobs. Will the market return to 2019 levels or continue to remain depressed. Much may depend upon the behaviour of the wider labour market for graduates. However, how many teachers decide to leave their jobs will also be important. It is also worth remembering that he supply of teachers leaving teacher preparation courses will not be sufficient in all subjects to meet the DfE’s estimate of need. How far ‘returners’ can make up the deficit only time will tell, but fewer advertised vacancies will also help close the gap.

I, for one, had wondered whether the pandemic and resulting effects on head teacher’s workload, might have resulted in a wave of departures. So far, in 2021, there is little evidence of any surge in departures of primary head teachers.

Although there have been fewer vacancies in London during the past twelve months, the Home Counties, and especially those parts of the Home Counties in the South East remain the part of the country driving the teacher labour market. This is not surprising as this are also contains the largest concentration of private schools. So far, these schools do not seem, as a sector, to have been badly affected by the pandemic in terms of pupil numbers. No doubt September enrolment will conform whether that is still the case.

Finally, although pupil numbers are still increasing in the secondary sector, will there be any effect from Brexit? Might some EU families return to their home country rather than stay in England? If so, could such departures have an effect on school rolls in some areas where there are large concentrations of EU citizen living in particular neighbourhoods? Comments on this point would be welcome.

8th March: Should schools reopen?

Earlier this afternoon a journalist rang me to ask my views on this question. What looks like being an ‘all or nothing’ decision by the government, will please some, worry others and upset yet others? As far as the risk to the pupils is concerned the NHS data on deaths is clear:

Number of deaths involving COVID-19 by sex and age group, England and Wales, registered between 28 December 2019 and 5 February 2021
UnitNumber of deaths
   
 MaleFemale
Under 1 year20
1 to 14 years45
15 to 44 years752497
45 to 64 years7,3054,107
65 to 74 years11,5136,695
75 to 84 years22,26915,813
85 years and over22,95627,304
Source: Office for National Statistics – Deaths registered weekly in England and Wales

The risk of death to pupils is extremely low. However, there is the risk of transmission by pupils to older age groups. However, the data on vaccinations now emerging is encouraging on this issue. So, although multi-generational households with school-age children will have older members more at risk, the risk seems to be mitigated by the vaccine. The risk will obviously be higher amongst those that haven’t been vaccinated. As a result, I would encourage everyone offered a vaccine to take up the offer.

Schools will no doubt test pupils and staff on a regular basis, and cases will no doubt increase in some areas, as they did in the autumn because of the large numbers of pupils mingling in close contact. Some older staff may be more at risk, and there is a case for vaccinating school staff by age, possibly concentrating on the 40-60 age group first.

In terms of learning, what in my youth was called ‘the hidden curriculum’ or ‘the informal curriculum’ may be as important as catching up on learning facts and figures. Young people need time to reform social groups and possibly, in some cases to take out their frustrations on the nearest adults in authority. For many that will be teachers. So, between now and the summer will be a time for re-engagement with on-site learning, ready hopefully for a new school-year in the autumn. There is still the issue of assessing potential to be considered so that students know they will be treated fairly. As an exercise that will take longer than some may think.

Finally, there needs to be an investigation into what went well and were there were faults that created barriers to learning. The education system as a whole seemed to have been suffering from what one might term the ‘Arcadia Approach’ of denying technology will change the business. The lack of preparedness for on-line learning is shaming. Business as usual must not just mean schooling as it was in the past. Not least because the digital divide has been shown to be real and profound. Education for all must mean just that and not education for some to one standard and to a lower level for others.

Open schools on March 8th and work through to Easter and then take stock. and, if offered a vaccination, please take it.

Miss a year or repeat a year?

Schooling in England has always been about pupils progressing in age-related cohorts based around an August/September birthday cut-off point. The exception was in those independent schools, celebrated in literature such as Tom Brown’s Schooldays, where a ‘remove’ form operated for those so far behind they couldn’t really move forward with their peers.

The issue of how to deal with lost learning as a result of the covid pandemic and school closures has started to revolve around the debate about either missing a year or repeating a year. Both have resource implications, as well as an impact on learners

By chance, I have experience of both approaches. The north London selective secondary school I attended in the late 1950s and early 1960s with my twin brother had a policy whereby the top form – of four – missed out the third year (Year 9) and progressed to complete a full set of ‘O’ levels in four rather than five years. Those pupils also studied Latin rather than taking woodwork or domestic science (food technology within design and technology for those not familiar with historical education terminology). The aim was to allow time for a third year in the sixth form to prepare for Oxbridge entrance examinations for those deemed bright enough to take that route.

These pupils subject to accelerated progression certainly lost some learning in all subjects, but the curriculum in subjects where there is a clearly defined path to examination success were not allowed to suffer.

As the twin, that took the usual five years to progress through the system to examinations at sixteen, I benefitted from having my other twin forge a path.  When we were both in the sixth form this meant that by choosing the same three subjects for ‘A’ level I had a ready-made set of notes to use.

As a result of the happenstance of our parents taking a civil service post in Africa, and the problem of needing to pass ‘O’ level English Language, I repeated the final year of the sixth form, spending three years in the sixth rather than the more usual two, and thus experiencing some of the  issues around repeating a year.

There are pros and cons to both approaches, but what might determine the outcome is resources. Do schools have the staff and space to allow a whole year group to repeat a year? For secondary schools, so long as they don’t have an intake, it might be feasible, but that would put pressure on primary schools to accommodate an extra year group. Where rolls are falling, this might be possible, but in some areas there won’t be the space, although finding the staff should be less of an issue.

Higher Education and further education would lose an intake, and the funds associated with these students. The government would need to compensate these institutions for lost revenue or risk financial pressure sending some institutions into real financial trouble.

A whole cohort missing a year might require a rethink of the examination syllabuses, but there are plenty of examples of children that prospered despite having missed education for health reasons. Indeed, I missed quite a lot of Year 8 due to having two operations. Perhaps that is why I struggled with the English Language examination.

A decision will need to be made soon, especially if the government wants to spend more cash on a catch-up scheme. This is not a decision that can be left to the market to solve fairly for all pupils.

ONS comment on covid deaths and the Teaching Profession

The Office for National Statistics has produced new data on covid related deaths by occupation groups. Their comments on the teaching profession are reproduced below. They cover the period between 9th March and 28th December 2020:

Deaths involving COVID-19 in teaching and educational professionals

Teaching and educational professionals refers to those qualified to teach in a wide range of settings from primary school through to university level education. It does not include other jobs in the teaching and educational sector such as administration.

There were 139 deaths involving the coronavirus (COVID-19) in teaching and educational professionals aged 20 to 64 years registered between 9 March and 28 December 2020 in England and Wales. For both sexes, rates of death involving COVID-19 for this group were statistically significantly  lower than the rate of death involving COVID-19 among those of the same age and sex, with 18.4 deaths per 100,000 males (66 deaths) and 9.8 deaths per 100,000 females (73 deaths), compared with 31.4 and 16.8 deaths per 100,000 in the population among males and females respectively.

Of the individual occupations, it was only possible to calculate a reliable rate for secondary education teaching professionals, who accounted for 37.4% of the total number of deaths among all teaching and educational professionals (52 deaths). With 39.2 deaths per 100,000 males (29 deaths) and 21.2 deaths per 100,000 females (23 deaths), rates of death involving COVID-19 in secondary education teaching professionals were not statistically significantly different than those of the same age and sex in the wider population.

ONS also compared the teaching occupations with all other professional occupations, allowing ONS to see how the deaths compare with professions with similar broad economic and educational backgrounds.

ONS found that rates of death involving COVID-19 in all teaching and educational professionals were not statistically significantly different to the rates seen in professional occupations (17.6 deaths per 100,000 males; 12.8 deaths per 100,000 females) as a whole, true for both sexes.

Of the specific teaching and education professions, the rate of death involving COVID-19 in male secondary education teaching professionals was statistically significantly higher than the rate of death involving COVID-19 in professional occupations in men of the same age.

https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/healthandsocialcare/causesofdeath/bulletins/coronaviruscovid19relateddeathsbyoccupationenglandandwales/deathsregisteredbetween9marchand28december2020

The previous ONS data on teacher deaths due to the pandemic was reported by this blog on the 11th May 2020 in a post entitled ‘Give us the data’.

The ONS data file also identifies in the occupational tables that there had been recorded 42 deaths of teaching assistants; 12 deaths of nursery nurses and four school secretaries.

As in May, male secondary classroom teachers seem to be the highest risk group and to quote ONS ‘the rate of death involving COVID-19 in male secondary education teaching professionals was statistically significantly higher than the rate of death involving COVID-19 in professional occupations in men of the same age’.

Those staff in schools in the older age groups look to be more at risk, even if the risk is less than for some other occupations, and male secondary teachers in the older age groups, not in leadership positions, might benefit from working more with a school’s on-line offering than with the children still in school until they have been vaccinated.

Supply Teachers left out in the cold

Last May, on this blog, I suggested that NQTs without a job could be hired as supernumerary staff to help schools with pupils that had fallen behind in their education during the first lockdown. Now we are into a new period of lockdown where schools are struggling to operate two parallel learning systems; one for pupils in schools – and there are many more of those – and the other for those still remote learning. As a result, if we really want to ensure high quality schooling for all, there seems to be good reason to boost the staffing of schools, lest the overload on the existing staff of trying to manage two distinct learning regimes at one time causes the system to collapse.

Intelligence is reaching me that although teachers on long-term supply contracts could be furloughed, they are often not being offered that option, possibly because employers are now required to pay National Insurance and Employer Pension Contributions. So, the risk is that instead of a win-win situation, we have the opposite where both teachers and schools lose out, and pupils’ education also suffers: all for the want of a small amount of cash.

Where a supply teacher is replacing a member of staff, then that contract should be honoured. During the autumn term supply teachers in parts of the country were reporting even less work than normal. When schools are fully staffed for September, the first part of the autumn term can be a lean time for supply work. However, I was told of one local authority where demand was higher than normal, as high attendance rates meant staff self-isolating needed to be replaced.

This term, has been shambolic, but the basic point needs to be reiterated, if schools need to run two systems to teach all pupils, either physically or remotely, then the funding arrangements need to make this possible. There is only so much goodwill that can be drawn upon. Supply teachers offer a pool of teachers that can help, but they must be funded.

There is also the more general issue of pay for supply teachers. This has never been good, especially where agencies need to make a profit on what they can charge schools. The teacher is the loser in this market, especially where there are several companies competing to cut prices to schools to secure work.

Indeed, supply teaching is a very cyclical business, and one with high fixed overheads for those companies operating on a traditional model. When schools are fully staffed, as they will be for the next few years, it is even more difficult to make money, and I expect to see some consolidation across the industry, and less work for teachers, especially in the primary sector where rolls are also falling.

I have long wondered why teachers don’t form cooperatives and take over the market themselves. They could also offer tutoring, where hourly rates are often higher than for classroom teaching, despite being one to one and not having to handle a whole class of pupils. A good cooperative could also offer coaching, mentoring, professional development and even adult learning, but it requires someone with an interest in running a business to set it up.

But, if you leave it to others, then what you get is what they are prepared to give you.

More Dunkirk than D-Day

Last March it was probably acceptable that schools had to invent their immediate responses to lockdown. After all, we were all facing situations we hadn’t expected. Much like the sudden collapse of the Allied armies in France in 1940, when faced with the Panzer Divisions assault, we muddled through and achieved more than might have been expected.

As I wrote on the 29th February in a blog post. ‘We are better equipped to deal with unforeseen events these days, whether fire, floods or pestilence; but only if we plan for them.’ I also pointed out that ‘In 1939 the country managed a mass evacuation of children from our cities under a Conservative Government.’ And I asked, ‘Does the civil service have the mentality to handle arrangements on such a scale today? After decades of a philosophy of private choice rather than public good, it may need a rethink, and quickly.’

In April, I mused that ‘Strategic thinking is still in short supply. There are group of Year 13 students, now to be assessed on their work before the outbreak that could form a useful coordinated volunteer force organised by their Sixth Form Tutor and reporting to the local hubs.

Apart from the obvious use of their talents to produce PPE on the schools’ 3D printers; sowing machines and other D&T resources they could be reducing the traffic jam of delivery vehicles clogging up suburban streets by trialling last mile cycle delivery from trans-shipment points to see how this would work. If petrol pumps are a transfer risk for the virus, we could use some as pump attendants, at least for vulnerable customers so that they could avoid touching the pumps and know that only the person serving them had handled the filling mechanism.’

Fast forward to January and we have the same level of chaos and muddle that professionals in education were faced with in March. The only change seems to be that the DfE guidance is clearer than it was in the spring.

Why did the government not use the time between March and December to plan for another lockdown. To move from the ‘make it up as you go along’ evacuation of Dunkirk to the meticulously planned D-Day assault on the Normandy beaches, backed by the deception exercise around Operation Fortitude.

Take provision of laptops and tablets. This system hasn’t worked. But nobody seems to have thought of all the reconditioned tablets sitting in small shops around the country. Even if they only lasted for a year, they might see some schools through the pandemic. Yes, I would like top of the line new equipment for those that haven’t access to any IT, but something now to start with is better than nothing until some uncertain date in the future.

Remote learning has been mostly un-coordinated and largely left to schools. This is an area where schools should have pooled knowledge and effort. It is as if no Minister has ever read Adam Smith and understood the principles of mass production over cottage-based industries. Expecting each school to reinvent the wheel is silly.

To continue the military analogy, it is as if infantry destined for the D-Day beaches were told, design your own training, and just get off the beach. The lack of a coherent middle tier that could pull MATs, diocese and local authority schools together to provide effective remote learning has frustrated both parents and young people with an outcome that hasn’t been as good as it could have been, and through no fault of teachers and school leaders.

Re-reading the ONS Report of May about risk to teachers from Covid, it was obvious, as I pointed out at the time in my blog that staff in schools, and especially in secondary schools, were classified as

‘… a group with a high possible exposure to any disease, presumably as they work close to large groups of children. In that respect, secondary school teachers interacting with many different pupils in the course of a day might been thought to have a higher potential risk factor than primary school teachers who are largely interacting with a smaller group of children each day. Of course, this is too simplistic, as it ignores the many other settings in schools from playgrounds, assemblies and meal times where all teachers can interact with large numbers of children. Primary teachers, and especially school leaders may have the added factor of interaction with parents that bring children to school and cluster at the school gate at the end of the day.’

https://www.ons.gov.uk/releases/covid19relateddeathsbyoccupationenglandandwalesdeathsregistereduptoandincluding20thapril2020

This risk should have been monitored through the autumn and especially since the new variant was detected, as it was a vital piece of information in the analysis of whether schools could continue to open on site or switch to remote learning. That it has taken FOI requests and other tactics for the professional associations to secure the data is not acceptable.

The lack of either strategic planning or operational excellence in terms of the school system is a disappointment, and will no doubt eventually have political repercussions. After all, schools impact widely on all families.

update 1230 6th January. According to The Guardian the government has designated all pupils without laptops as vulnerable pupils and thus able to access schools. Well, that’s one way of solving the problem.

Should schools re-open next week?

There is probably no ‘certain’ answer at this moment in time to that question, but there is a political decision to be made. By the time the answer is certain, the time for decision will have passed and whether by default or decision there will have been an outcome.

Learning versus transmission seems to be at the heart of the debate. If the new variant of covid hadn’t appeared, then the answer would have been simple: open primary schools and secondary schools for Years 11 and 13, although I think classroom subjects for Year 13 could be taught on-line rather than face to face.

However, with the more transmissible strain now dominant in many areas, the issue is possibly more complex for some. Closing schools will affect learning and create issues for parents in terms of childcare, especially where they cannot work from home. Can we overcome the loss of learning time as a Society, if we put our minds to it? After all, we have created new forms of learning, so ought we not to be able to identify ways of recovering essential learning? Much may depend upon making the learning attractive to the learners. Boring rote learning won’t work. Will we need a National Reading Recovery campaign and a similar one for numeracy once the pandemic is over?

The NHS is always under strain at this time of year and the weather forecasters are suggesting a few weeks of cold weather. The consequences of that sort of weather pattern for hospitals needs to be taken into account, since other ailments haven’t taken a holiday just because of covid. Then there is the backlog of other treatments, especially in-patient treatments that need ICU beds. Do politicians need to take these factors into account when weighing up the issue of schools re-opening?

Now it is clear that mass testing for all pupils won’t be in place next week, whatever was said before Christmas, is it sensible to bring back pupils into setting where transmission is likely to be high either person to person or via surfaces? I would like to know whether the latest variant of covid lingers longer on surfaces. If so, that might be a powerful argument for not re-opening schools, because however often surfaces are cleaned, there as potentially just too many of them, not to mention those encountered on the way to and from schools and colleges.

Personally, based upon the public knowledge available to me, I would not re-open secondary schools and further education colleges for the first two weeks of term while patterns of transmission after Christmas become clear. I would re-open primary schools, but allow pupils living in high risk households not to attend until we know more about transmission rates among different groups. This is where the focus on ‘recovery’ learning will be most important going forward.

Finally, there are the issues of the mental health of young people to be added into the equation along with the physical and mental welfare of all the staff and their families. In the end, any decision is better than none.

Update: 1800 on 30th December. Seems like I was mostly correct, although I didn’t foresee the closure of so many primary schools. Next question: can exams survive?

DfE announces a bit of history

Last week, the DfE published the annual results of revenue related exports and transactional education activity in 2018. That now seems like a different world. https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/uk-revenue-from-education-related-exports-and-transnational-education-activity-2018

Still, 2018 was a good year for education experts, with even the Further Education sector reversing the downturn of previous years and experiencing upturns in both fee income and income from living costs: albeit only by small amounts. Still, this was the first upturn in FE exports since 2010, the year when I think the data for the time series was first established.

Overall, across all areas, there was a 10% increase in export activity and a slight fall of 0.8% in transactional education activity in 2018

Higher Education once again earned the lion’s share of the income, accounting for 69% of all exports and transactional education activity in2018.  This was higher education’s largest percentage share, and some 9% more than their share in2010.

Further Education and English Language Training have been the main losers of market share since 2010, although both recorded upturns is 2018. ELT increased its market share by one percent to eight per cent. However, FE still saw its market share remain at one percent in 2018.

Independent schools market share reduced from five to four per cent at the end of 2018, back to their share in 2010. However, this was largely due to the strong showing from the higher education sector during 2018.

Transactional education activity, where the exports are delivered overseas through ventures such as satellite campuses and overseas consultancy lost ground in 2018, falling back to only 9% of total activity.

Among sub-sectors, equipment sales were strong in 2018, but educational publishing failed to maintain the growth witnessed in 2017. Most of the higher education student growth was, perhaps not surprisingly, in the non-EU student sector of the market. The latter remained stable. What will happen to this income stream in 2021 and future years will be interesting to observe, but it might be 2025 before data are published that reveal any trend post Brexit.

These figures may well be the penultimate in a run of good years for exports. There is little reason to believe that 2019 will not have produced further growth, although EU higher education income might have slowed down. Come the 2020 data, the results might be different. Will new income from distance learning have been sufficient to offset losses elsewhere resulting for the covid pandemic affecting the second half of the year?

Perhaps now is the time to remove overseas students from the immigration statistics, at least for those on first degree courses, even if not for sub-degree and postgraduate level courses where monitoring might be more challenging?

Still, let’s congratulate a successful export drive in 2018, and hope that covid and Brexit between them create new opportunities rather than decimate an otherwise successful sector of the British economy, since these are UK numbers and not just for England.

Another Greenwich Judgement avoided

Greenwich in South East London already features in education law history for the ‘Greenwich Judgement’ on school choice. Today, it seemingly avoided the possibly of creating a second precedent by accepting that it would not be in the interest of local people to spend money defending any legal action by the DfE on closing schools.

As usual, there are pros and cons to both the Council’s position and that of the government at Westminster. What is lacking is a clear understanding of guidelines that fit a changing set of circumstances. The BBC’s World at One programme interviewed the Leader of Basildon Council – a Tory – where several schools are closed because of very high rates of infection. He defended that situation.

Generally, opinion is that education is a ‘good thing’ and leaving parents to arrange childcare at short notice can cause problems that should be avoided if at all possible. All the current issues were foreseeable, and the present situation demonstrates the lack of cooperative planning that is the hallmark of the present administration, and might yet be its downfall.

The issues are the same, where infection leads to transmission to higher risks groups from lower risks groups there is a danger, but within lower risks groups it is less of an issue. This appears to be the case with university students that remain in a group and don’t interact with the wider community. Schools are different, by their very community nature.

Low income, multi-generational households, especially in the non-White community, remain at very high risk from the pandemic and it is understandable that schools can play a part in the chain of transmission. But low income families have less space for on-line learning even if they have access to the technology.

So, no easy answer. But a set of criteria

Local public health officials can assess the trends and liaise with schools and education officers. Where more than a certain level of infections are present, local officials should notify the DfE of intending closure of a group of schools and provide the evidence in the same as a single school would use and there shouldn’t be an issue.

Where it becomes complicated is the notion of a ‘preventative closure’ to try to stop a spike happening. Surely, by now, we have enough evidence to set some criteria for where it is appropriate to close schools, and where it is better to keep them open?

Even with the vaccination programme, it seems likely that next term is going to be a challenging one for schools, their pupils and for parents. The clearer the agreed guidelines the better.