Following a briefing call on the proposals for a mass testing
programme for secondary schools, beginning in January, the joint
general secretaries of the National Education Union, have written
to the Secretary of State with a list of concerns.
The full text of their letter to follows:
17 December 2020
Dear Gavin
As we currently understand them, following a briefing call from
the Schools’ Minister, , we consider the current proposals to operate a mass
testing programme for secondary school pupils to be inoperable.
Telling school leaders, on the last day of term, that they must
organise volunteers and parents, supported by their staff, to
test pupils in the first week of term, whilst year 11 and 13
pupils are on site for in school teaching, is a ridiculous ask of
professionals who are exhausted by the unreasonable demands,
backed by legal threats, that they have been subjected to this
term.
We are also highly concerned by the materials you issued on
Tuesday 15th December, in the last week of term, which give rise
to many questions, listed below:
1. The examples detailed in the testing handbook are, we
understand, based on the reality that the army or other external
trained staff ran the tests. Do you have any pilots where school
staff have run these tests with no external support?
2. In your proposal school leaders are asked to find staff to run
these tests. In today’s announcement, school leaders are asked to
find volunteers, such as parents and governors, to run the tests.
Running such medical procedures is significantly outside the
experience and job description of existing school staff and
volunteers. School leaders are anyway facing significant staff
shortages due to the pandemic. What studies have you carried out
about the feasibility of recruiting such staff, and volunteers?
3. The BMJ journal suggest that tests run by non-specialists are
significantly less accurate, what pilots have you run on the
accuracy of the tests that you are proposing?
4. You say that reasonable extra costs will be met - but you have
not even met the costs that schools have so far run up in supply
staff, what is your definition of "reasonable"?
5. The NEU has called for regular mass testing of asymptomatic
staff and students: this would find asymptomatic cases and allow
them and their contacts to be isolated, contributing to
significantly driving down cases overall; however, our reading of
your current proposals is that is not what you are suggesting. We
understand that you mean whilst school staff are to be tested on
a regular basis, school students would only be tested if they are
a close contact of a student who has tested positive on the
normal testing system. Is that correct? (This was not the
proposals as we understood it when PHE talked us through a pilot
some time ago).
6. Further, what definition of close contact are you using? Given
that students travel together both to and from school, mixing
across year group bubbles and across schools, a definition that
only includes those they sit next to in class may be deficient.
Have you modelled various definitions of close contact?
Your proposal suggests that it will allow asymptomatic students
to be found, but on our reading, that is very misleading. Only
close contacts will be tested but in some of those asymptomatic
cases may be missed. Compared with the current methodology, where
close contacts are asked to work from home, your proposal is
likely to lead to more positive students being in school. What
modelling or pilots do you have of that?
The issues we raise, and the importance of the questions we ask,
lead us again to ask you to meet us at the earliest opportunity
so that we can understand better the thinking behind today’s
announcement and the evidence behind the proposals before we
decide if we can support them.
With best wishes
Mary Bousted Kevin Courtney
Joint General Secretary Joint General Secretary
