We've been falsely told 'schools are safe', 'don't drive community transmission', & teachers don't have a higher risk of infection repeatedly by govt & their advisors- to justify some of the most negligent policies in history. 🧵
Questions have to be asked about the evidence Jenny Harries gave to the Education Committee today about the risk to teachers.
— Adam Hamdy (@adamhamdy) January 19, 2021
Was she aware of this data?
If not, why wasn\u2019t she properly briefed?#COVID19 #schools https://t.co/4wa1PyAJld pic.twitter.com/eqFjaA1zYC
Why?
https://t.co/EcKP8Vq2yo
.@educationgovuk data released show on average the rate of Covid-19 infection is 1.9 times higher amongst primary & secondary teachers than the general population, & 2 times higher for special school teachers.
— National Education Union (@NEUnion) January 19, 2021
Read our full commenthttps://t.co/vNl0zUEiOi#MakeSchoolsSafe pic.twitter.com/FTHdKYZA8a
https://t.co/Bwu6QXm6Q1
I've been a hearing a lot about how children are more infectious *now* & contribute to transmission because of the B117 variant, but didn't before. This is a myth. Children & schools have always played an important role in transmission. Time to lay this to rest. Thread.
— Deepti Gurdasani (@dgurdasani1) January 5, 2021
https://t.co/nFrjbuTiPC
More from Deepti Gurdasani
Brief thread to debunk the repeated claims we hear about transmission not happening 'within school walls', infection in school children being 'a reflection of infection from the community', and 'primary school children less likely to get infected and contribute to transmission'.
I've heard a lot of scientists claim these three - including most recently the chief advisor to the CDC, where the claim that most transmission doesn't happen within the walls of schools. There is strong evidence to rebut this claim. Let's look at
Let's look at the trends of infection in different age groups in England first- as reported by the ONS. Being a random survey of infection in the community, this doesn't suffer from the biases of symptom-based testing, particularly important in children who are often asymptomatic
A few things to note:
1. The infection rates among primary & secondary school children closely follow school openings, closures & levels of attendance. E.g. We see a dip in infections following Oct half-term, followed by a rise after school reopening.
We see steep drops in both primary & secondary school groups after end of term (18th December), but these drops plateau out in primary school children, where attendance has been >20% after re-opening in January (by contrast with 2ndary schools where this is ~5%).
I've heard a lot of scientists claim these three - including most recently the chief advisor to the CDC, where the claim that most transmission doesn't happen within the walls of schools. There is strong evidence to rebut this claim. Let's look at
The science shows us that most disease transmission does not happen in the walls of the school, but it comes in from the community. So, CDC is advocating to get our K-5 students back in school at least in a hybrid mode with universal mask wearing and 6 ft of distancing. https://t.co/dfvJ2nl2s4
— Rochelle Walensky, MD, MPH (@CDCDirector) February 14, 2021
Let's look at the trends of infection in different age groups in England first- as reported by the ONS. Being a random survey of infection in the community, this doesn't suffer from the biases of symptom-based testing, particularly important in children who are often asymptomatic
A few things to note:
1. The infection rates among primary & secondary school children closely follow school openings, closures & levels of attendance. E.g. We see a dip in infections following Oct half-term, followed by a rise after school reopening.
We see steep drops in both primary & secondary school groups after end of term (18th December), but these drops plateau out in primary school children, where attendance has been >20% after re-opening in January (by contrast with 2ndary schools where this is ~5%).
This is the exact problem with our government's thinking & response- despite this strategy of 'tolerating deaths' and half-way measures having spectacularly failed, it's quite amazing that our govt still hasn't learned anything, & continues to promote a policy of death. Thread
Had we adopted an elimination strategy early on, rather than one of tolerating a certain level of infection, we wouldn't be here now. The reason we're here is because the govt never committed to elimination.
We eased lockdown in May when infection levels were much higher than when other countries in Europe did this. The govt was warned about this, but did this to 'help the economy'. Not only did this lead us into the 2nd wave, the need for further lockdowns harmed the economy further
It's very clear from global evidence that we cannot 'tolerate a level of community transmission' and maintain 'R at or just below 1', which has been our governments policy for a long time. This isn't sustainable & very rapidly gets out of control, leading to exponential rises
Coupled with late action to contain these surges, not only does this lead to many more deaths, and much more morbidity with Long COVID, it also creates a fertile ground for viral mutations to accumulate with a greater risk of adaptation, which is exactly what happened in the UK
U.K. needs to confront
— Esther McVey (@EstherMcVey1) January 2, 2021
\u2018The challenge that faces us is to decide - are we going to try to pursue the elimination of Covid-19 regardless of the costs or decide on a tolerable level of deaths (like we do with the flu) in order to return to a normal life?\u2019
https://t.co/9hWbHIPJUq
Had we adopted an elimination strategy early on, rather than one of tolerating a certain level of infection, we wouldn't be here now. The reason we're here is because the govt never committed to elimination.
We eased lockdown in May when infection levels were much higher than when other countries in Europe did this. The govt was warned about this, but did this to 'help the economy'. Not only did this lead us into the 2nd wave, the need for further lockdowns harmed the economy further
It's very clear from global evidence that we cannot 'tolerate a level of community transmission' and maintain 'R at or just below 1', which has been our governments policy for a long time. This isn't sustainable & very rapidly gets out of control, leading to exponential rises
Coupled with late action to contain these surges, not only does this lead to many more deaths, and much more morbidity with Long COVID, it also creates a fertile ground for viral mutations to accumulate with a greater risk of adaptation, which is exactly what happened in the UK
More from Education
Normally I enjoy the high standards of journalism in @guardian . Not today as disappointed with misleading headline that suggest infections are spreading fastest in children. It'll worry parents/teachers & I doubt most readers will unpick the
The latest REACT1 report shows prevalence of infection in ALL age groups has fallen, including children aged 5-12 from 1.59% in Round 8 to 0.86% in Round 9a. The authors of REACT1 report also (wisely) didn't try to interpret the prevalence figures.
If this were a research trial you wouldn't place much weight on the age differences in % prevalence because of the wide confidence intervals, i.e. differences weren't statistically significant.
3/
I've previously tweeted on the challenges (& dangers) of interpreting surveillance data. One would need lots more contextual info to make sense of it & arrive at sound
Undoubtedly some will extrapolate from the prevalence of infection figures in children to other settings i.e. schools based on the headline. I'd advise caution as there is a real risk of over-interpretation through extrapolation of limited data. Association is not causation.
5/
The latest REACT1 report shows prevalence of infection in ALL age groups has fallen, including children aged 5-12 from 1.59% in Round 8 to 0.86% in Round 9a. The authors of REACT1 report also (wisely) didn't try to interpret the prevalence figures.
If this were a research trial you wouldn't place much weight on the age differences in % prevalence because of the wide confidence intervals, i.e. differences weren't statistically significant.
3/
I've previously tweeted on the challenges (& dangers) of interpreting surveillance data. One would need lots more contextual info to make sense of it & arrive at sound
Misinterpretation of surveillance data is a serious issue. Surveillance data needs to come with a warning label - Open to biases - interpret with caution! Some may not realize that surveillance often does not measure all infection, it's a proxy for actual disease incidence.
— Andrew Lee (@andrewleedr) February 14, 2021
1/
Undoubtedly some will extrapolate from the prevalence of infection figures in children to other settings i.e. schools based on the headline. I'd advise caution as there is a real risk of over-interpretation through extrapolation of limited data. Association is not causation.
5/
An appallingly tardy response to such an important element of reading - apologies. The growing recognition of fluency as the crucial developmental area for primary education is certainly encouraging helping us move away from the obsession with reading comprehension tests.
It is, as you suggest, a nuanced pedagogy with the tripartite algorithm of rate, accuracy and prosody at times conflating the landscape and often leading to an educational shrug of the shoulders, a convenient abdication of responsibility and a return to comprehension 'skills'.
Taking each element separately (but not hierarchically) may be helpful but always remembering that for fluency they occur simultaneously (not dissimilar to sentence structure, text structure and rhetoric in fluent writing).
Rate, or words-read-per-minute, is the easiest. Faster reading speeds are EVIDENCE of fluency development but attempting to 'teach' children(or anyone) to read faster is fallacious (Carver, 1985) and will result in processing deficit which in young readers will be catastrophic.
Reading rate is dependent upon eye-movements and cognitive processing development along with orthographic development (more on this later).
Sorry - a bit of a brain dump post - but I'd appreciate any responses and/or directions towards any applicable research.@Suchmo83 @Mr_AlmondED @TimRasinski1 @ReadingShanahan @mrspennyslater @TheReadingApe @PieCorbett @ReadingRockets @teach_well
— Mr Leyshon (@RyonWLeyshon) February 4, 2021
It is, as you suggest, a nuanced pedagogy with the tripartite algorithm of rate, accuracy and prosody at times conflating the landscape and often leading to an educational shrug of the shoulders, a convenient abdication of responsibility and a return to comprehension 'skills'.
Taking each element separately (but not hierarchically) may be helpful but always remembering that for fluency they occur simultaneously (not dissimilar to sentence structure, text structure and rhetoric in fluent writing).
Rate, or words-read-per-minute, is the easiest. Faster reading speeds are EVIDENCE of fluency development but attempting to 'teach' children(or anyone) to read faster is fallacious (Carver, 1985) and will result in processing deficit which in young readers will be catastrophic.
Reading rate is dependent upon eye-movements and cognitive processing development along with orthographic development (more on this later).
Time for some thoughts on schools given the revised SickKids document and the fact that ON decided to leave most schools closed. ON is not the only jurisdiction to do so, but important to note that many jurisdictions would not have done so -even with higher incidence rates.
As outlined in the tweet by @NishaOttawa yesterday, the situation is complex, and not a simple right or wrong https://t.co/DO0v3j9wzr. And no one needs to list all the potential risks and downsides of prolonged school closures.
On the other hand: while school closures do not directly protect our most vulnerable in long-term care at all, one cannot deny that any factor potentially increasing community transmission may have an indirect effect on the risk to these institutions, and on healthcare.
The question is: to what extend do schools contribute to transmission, and how to balance this against the risk of prolonged school closures. The leaked data from yesterday shows a mixed picture -schools are neither unicorns (ie COVID free) nor infernos.
Assuming this data is largely correct -while waiting for an official publication of the data, it shows first and foremost the known high case numbers at Thorncliff, while other schools had been doing very well -are safe- reiterating the impact of socioeconomics on the COVID risk.
A group of Ontario experts led by SickKids has updated its guidance for school operation during the COVID-19 pandemic. The living document, COVID-19: Updated Guidance for School Operation During the Pandemic, can be read here: https://t.co/rotLqDqkQh pic.twitter.com/q7kVezAPoG
— SickKids_TheHospital (@SickKidsNews) January 21, 2021
As outlined in the tweet by @NishaOttawa yesterday, the situation is complex, and not a simple right or wrong https://t.co/DO0v3j9wzr. And no one needs to list all the potential risks and downsides of prolonged school closures.
1/It's the eve of provincial announcements on schools reopening for in-person instruction.
— Nisha Thampi (@NishaOttawa) January 20, 2021
Households are under stress and experts are divided on whether schools are unicorns or infernos.
Everyone wants to do right by kids, who have borne so much throughout this pandemic.
On the other hand: while school closures do not directly protect our most vulnerable in long-term care at all, one cannot deny that any factor potentially increasing community transmission may have an indirect effect on the risk to these institutions, and on healthcare.
The question is: to what extend do schools contribute to transmission, and how to balance this against the risk of prolonged school closures. The leaked data from yesterday shows a mixed picture -schools are neither unicorns (ie COVID free) nor infernos.
Assuming this data is largely correct -while waiting for an official publication of the data, it shows first and foremost the known high case numbers at Thorncliff, while other schools had been doing very well -are safe- reiterating the impact of socioeconomics on the COVID risk.
You May Also Like
"I really want to break into Product Management"
make products.
"If only someone would tell me how I can get a startup to notice me."
Make Products.
"I guess it's impossible and I'll never break into the industry."
MAKE PRODUCTS.
Courtesy of @edbrisson's wonderful thread on breaking into comics – https://t.co/TgNblNSCBj – here is why the same applies to Product Management, too.
There is no better way of learning the craft of product, or proving your potential to employers, than just doing it.
You do not need anybody's permission. We don't have diplomas, nor doctorates. We can barely agree on a single standard of what a Product Manager is supposed to do.
But – there is at least one blindingly obvious industry consensus – a Product Manager makes Products.
And they don't need to be kept at the exact right temperature, given endless resource, or carefully protected in order to do this.
They find their own way.
make products.
"If only someone would tell me how I can get a startup to notice me."
Make Products.
"I guess it's impossible and I'll never break into the industry."
MAKE PRODUCTS.
Courtesy of @edbrisson's wonderful thread on breaking into comics – https://t.co/TgNblNSCBj – here is why the same applies to Product Management, too.
"I really want to break into comics"
— Ed Brisson (@edbrisson) December 4, 2018
make comics.
"If only someone would tell me how I can get an editor to notice me."
Make Comics.
"I guess it's impossible and I'll never break into the industry."
MAKE COMICS.
There is no better way of learning the craft of product, or proving your potential to employers, than just doing it.
You do not need anybody's permission. We don't have diplomas, nor doctorates. We can barely agree on a single standard of what a Product Manager is supposed to do.
But – there is at least one blindingly obvious industry consensus – a Product Manager makes Products.
And they don't need to be kept at the exact right temperature, given endless resource, or carefully protected in order to do this.
They find their own way.
