It’s too early for schools to reopen on 1 June. Teachers’ concerns are justified

Editorial: There is no doubt that trying to make six-year-olds stay two metres apart is a practical impossibility

The nature of schooling means that close contact of all concerned cannot be fully avoided (Getty)

There is something distasteful about anyone who is not a teacher calling for teachers to be “heroes”, an imaginative euphemism for “victims of coronavirus”.

Volunteering others to put their lives on the line is not a noble sort of activity; bravery is one thing that cannot be done remotely. Many teachers and their unions are understandably concerned about the risks to themselves, their families and the children in their care from a full return to the classrooms (though vulnerable children and those of key workers have been at school for some time). Their concerns are justified.

The unions are adamant that their members should not return unless the schools are “safe”. But what is “safe” in this context? Apart from a hermit existence, there are no entirely safe environments free from even the possibility of infection. The teaching unions rightly say they want to hear “the science”, but that is unclear. It seems to be the case that children are less seriously affected by Covid-19, but the extent to which they can carry and spread the coronavirus is still being researched. There is no definitive answer at the moment, and thus no science to guide a decision.

Of course there are measures that can be taken to make schools safer. Testing, extensive and regular, of pupils, staff and parents would offer one way to keep coronavirus out of schools. To some extent on the front line, teachers and other school staff deserve to have the right personal protective equipment, even though that may make teaching more difficult. Staggering pupils’ starting times and reducing class sizes might also minimise the risk of infection. Not sharing toys and pens and maintaining social distancing would also help in schools.

However, there is no doubt that trying to make six-year-olds stay two metres apart is a practical impossibility, and the nature of schooling means that close contact of all concerned cannot be fully avoided.

But there are other factors. The longer the absence from the classroom, the more damage is being done to the child’s education. Being cooped up in a flat with little to occupy them cannot be good for a child’s health, or a parent’s. And with no access to schooling or childcare many adults are unable to get back to work, putting their livelihoods at risk, with all the dismal implications unemployment carries for a child’s future prospects.

Until a vaccination is developed or herd immunity is reached, there can be no guarantee of making any workplace safe, but the schools cannot be kept shut indefinitely. Yet a return now seems premature, given the incidence of infection and the R rate. The guideline date (for England) of 1 June for some schools is unrealistic and too close to the scheduled school holidays to make any real difference. As with so much else about Covid-19, a comprehensive testing regime would be something of a game-changer for the schools. We are told, continually, that testing is being “ramped up”. When it is, the schools can return to something like normality.