Splitting classes in half and having them attend schools alternate weeks could slash the effect on the coronavirus ‘R’ number, government experts believe.
Evidence considered by the Scientific Advisory Group on Emergencies (SAGE) suggests the impact on the spread of the disease be a fraction would be dramatically smaller if pupils come back part time.
A raft of documents released this afternoon also suggest that children are less likely to be infected and infectious than adults.
Many of the concerns about schools returning appear to be over the knock-on impact on social distancing, with more mixing of families and parents returning to work.
An assessment of various models of the impact of changes on the R rate shows the impact, on a scale of zero to one, would be 0.24 if classes were split and attended alternate weeks.
If half the class went in in the morning and half in the afternoon that would rise to 0.4. The maximum impact of one would be if schools came back completely.
A document from a behavioural insight meeting on May 1 said: ‘Although not initially one of the options proposed by DfE, options 7b (classes split in two, with children attending on alternate weeks) emerged from the joint discussions as having particular potential merit for further consideration.’
The findings will likely add to arguments with unions over whether it is safe for children to return, and if it can be achieved without triggering another flare up of the virus.
The files emerged as a SAGE source claimed Government plans to reopen primary schools are grounded in welfare concerns rather than evidence younger pupils are less vulnerable.
An assessment of various models of the impact of changes on the R rate shows the impact, on a scale of zero to one, would be 0.24 if classes were split and attended alternate weeks
This is how social distanced desks will look at Holywell Village First School in Northumberland
In the first phase of his back-to-school blueprint, Boris Johnson wants children in England in reception, Year 1 and Year 6 to go back to class on June 1.
However, the exact shape of the reopening is being left in the hands of headteachers.
Teaching unions have been threatening to boycott the move over safety fears, while a slew of councils have said they will not fall into line. Nicola Sturgeon has said schools in Scotland will not reopen until August, after the usual summer holiday north of the border.
According to the SAGE papers, evidence on how likely children are to transmit Covid-19 remains ‘inconclusive’.
Wider contextual issues – including whether families have black, Asian and minority ethnic (BAME) members – must be taken into account when assessing the impact of relaxing school closures on transmission.
Teachers do not appear to be at a greater risk of catching Covid-19 than other professions – but there is still some risk.
The Sage papers suggest that younger teachers’ attendance in schools could be prioritised in order to decrease the likelihood of infection for school staff in more vulnerable groups.
The publication of the advice comes after education unions and council leaders called for the evidence underpinning the proposal to reopen schools in England to be released.
‘Evidence remains inconclusive on both the susceptibility and infectivity of children, but the balance of evidence suggests that both may be lower than in adults,’ according to the scientific modelling.
Meanwhile, a separate study has found children have half the chance of catching coronavirus as adults.
University College London researchers analysed 6,000 studies looking into the link between the viral disease and children.
They found the risk of catching COVID-19 in children and teenagers was 56 per cent lower compared to adults over 20.
The scientists say their findings imply children are likely to play a lesser role in transmission of the disease because fewer of them get infected in the first place.
Lead author Professor Russell Viner told a press conference ahead of the paper’s publication today that the results show the ‘balance of risks for children is strongly towards a return to school’.
The UCL team are the latest experts to throw their support behind Boris Johnson amid a furious row about English schools restarting in June.
Eminent statistician Sir David Spiegelhalter, from Cambridge University, also claims the risk for children catching COVID-19 is ‘unbelievably low’.
Yet the PM has faced ferocious backlash from parents and teaching unions for his plan to get children in reception, year 1 and year 6 back to school on June 1.
Scores of councils have refused to reopen amid fears pupils will spread the virus between each other, their teachers teachers and families.
Children have half the chance of catching coronavirus as adults, leading British scientists have found (Primary school children in Nice, France)
In the largest study of its kind, UCL scientists analysed 6,000 international scientific papers looking into children’s susceptibility to infection and severity of illness.
Of them, just 18 were found to be of high enough quality to be considered in their analysis – half of which had not been peer-reviewed (scrutinised by other scientists).
Nine were contact-tracing studies, where researchers tracked close contacts of diagnosed patients.
Eight were population-screening studies, whereby random samples of society were tested for the virus.
And one was a systematic review of small household clusters, where entire families had been infected.
The analysis – yet to be published in a journal – showed that children and young people had 56 per cent lower odds of catching SARS-CoV-2 from an infected person, compared with adults over 20)
Researchers did not have sufficient data to examine whether children under 12 differed to teenagers in susceptibility.
Under-18s also appear to account for just one in 10 family clusters of the viral disease, although this was based on just one study so the evidence is weak.
While children appear less likely to catch the virus from others, once they are infected researchers remain uncertain about how likely children are to pass it on.
Lead author Russell Viner, professor of adolescent health at UCL, said: ‘There is an increasing amount of data now available on children and COVID-19, and this is the first comprehensive study to carefully review and summarise what we do and do not know about susceptibility and transmission.
‘Our findings show children and young people appear 56 per cent less likely to contract COVID-19 from infected others.
‘Susceptibility is a key part of the chain of infection, and this supports the view that children are likely to play a smaller role in transmitting the virus and proliferating the pandemic, although considerable uncertainty remains.
‘This new data provides essential evidence to governments around the world to inform their decision-making on whether to reopen schools and reduce or end lockdown measures.’
Co-author Dr Rosalind Eggo, an infectious disease modeller at the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, said: ‘It [the study] suggests that children and young people are at lower risk of infection than adults and may therefore play a smaller role in the epidemic as a whole.
‘This new evidence will help us better understand the possible effect of school reopening on transmission in schools and in the community.’
It comes after a report by the ‘Independent SAGE’ committee claimed it is not safe to reopen schools on June 1.
Sir David King – who chairs the ‘Independent SAGE’ committee and was Tony Blair’s Chief Scientific Adviser when he was prime minister – said it is ‘too soon’ for children to return.
His alternative SAGE committee of experts says delaying schools reopening for two weeks would allow for the Government’s ‘test, trace and isolate’ programme, including its delayed app, to be established.
In the first phase of his back-to-school blueprint, Boris Johnson wants children in Reception, Year 1 and Year 6 to go back to class on June 1.
An expert on Downing Street’s scientific advisory subcommittee on schools claimed that these specific year groups were selected based on worries for their education and wellbeing – not that they are more shielded to the disease.
Although age is a factor in how at-risk an infected person is to Covid-19 symptoms, modelling found there was ‘no increased risk to one year group over another’.
The revelations that there is no difference in the vulnerability of certain year groups will likely whip up anger from teachers’ unions, who claim social distancing is much harder to enforce in primary schools.