Initial estimates of staff and pupils testing positive for the coronavirus (COVID-19) across a sample of schools within selected local authority areas in England.

Number of COVID-19 cases (PCR test) in schools by county A graphical representation of the numbers is available on the website Covid19 Location Picture Schools. Character separator is comma, character set is UTF-8

This dataset includes information on school reported COVID-19 testing and case positive data from the 2021-2022 academic year. Data was collected from private schools on each operational day using the daily school survey form, which school administrators access by logging in to the NYSDOH school survey website.

The primary goal of publishing this dataset is to provide users timely information about disease spread and reporting of positive cases within schools. The data will be updated daily, reflecting data submitted by school administrators the previous day.

This dataset contains a list of school locations across New York City offering COVID-19 testing locations. The list is sorted by district, school borough and three digit school number.

Every day, schools, child care centres and licensed home child care agencies report to the Ministry of Education on children, students and staff that have positive cases of COVID-19. If there is a discrepancy between numbers reported here and those reported publicly by a Public Health Unit, please consider the number reported by the Public Health Unit to be the most up-to-date. Schools and school boards report when a school is closed to the Ministry of Education. Data is current as of 2:00 pm the previous day. This dataset is subject to change. Data is only updated on weekdays excluding provincial holidays Effective June 15, 2022, board and school staff will not be expected to report student/staff absences and closures in the Absence Reporting Tool. The ministry will no longer report absence rates or school/child care closures on Ontario.ca for the remainder of the school year. Learn how the Government of Ontario is helping to keep Ontarians safe during the 2019 Novel Coronavirus outbreak. ##Summary of school closures This is a summary of school closures in Ontario. Data includes: * Number of schools closed * Total number of schools * Percentage of schools closed ##School Absenteeism This report provides a summary of schools and school boards that have reported staff and student absences. Data includes: * School board * School * City or Town * Percentage of staff and students who are absent ##Summary of cases in schools This report provides a summary of COVID-19 activity in publicly-funded Ontario schools. Data includes: * School-related cases (total) * School-related student cases * School-related staff cases * Current number of schools with a reported case * Current number of schools closed Note: In some instances the type of cases are not identified due to privacy considerations. ##Schools with active COVID-19 cases This report lists schools and school boards that have active cases of COVID-19. Data includes : * School Board * School * Municipality * Confirmed Student Cases * Confirmed Staff Cases * Total Confirmed Cases ##Cases in school board partners This report lists confirmed active cases of COVID-19 for other school board partners (e.g. bus drivers, authorized health professionals etc.) and will group boards if there is a case that overlaps. Data includes : * School Board(s) * School Municipality * Confirmed cases – other school board partners ##Summary of targeted testing conducted in schools This data includes all tests that have been reported to the Ministry of Education since February 1, 2021. School boards and other testing partners will report to the Ministry every Wednesday based on data from the previous seven days. Data includes : * School boards or regions * Number of schools invited to participate in the last seven days * Total number of tests conducted in the last seven days * Cumulative number of tests conducted * Number of new cases identified in the last seven days * Cumulative number of cases identified ##Summary of asymptomatic testing at conducted in pharmacies: This is a summary of COVID-19 rapid antigen testing conducted at participating pharmacies in Ontario since March 27, 2021. * Total number of tests conducted in the last seven days * Cumulative number of tests conducted * Number of new cases identified in the last seven days * Cumulative number of cases identified

On March 2, 2022 DC Health announced the District’s new COVID-19 Community Level key metrics and reporting. COVID-19 cases are now reported on a weekly basis. District of Columbia Public Schools testing for the number of positive tests and quarantined. Due to rapidly changing nature of COVID-19, data for March 2020 is limited.General Guidelines for Interpreting Disease Surveillance DataDuring a disease outbreak, the health department will collect, process, and analyze large amounts of information to understand and respond to the health impacts of the disease and its transmission in the community. The sources of disease surveillance information include contact tracing, medical record review, and laboratory information, and are considered protected health information. When interpreting the results of these analyses, it is important to keep in mind that the disease surveillance system may not capture the full picture of the outbreak, and that previously reported data may change over time as it undergoes data quality review or as additional information is added. These analyses, especially within populations with small samples, may be subject to large amounts of variation from day to day. Despite these limitations, data from disease surveillance is a valuable source of information to understand how to stop the spread of COVID19.

This dataset includes information on school reported COVID-19 testing and case positive data from the 2021-2022 academic year. Data was collected from BOCES programs on each operational day using the daily school survey form, which school administrators access by logging in to the NYSDOH school survey website.

The primary goal of publishing this dataset is to provide users timely information about disease spread and reporting of positive cases within schools. The data will be updated daily, reflecting data submitted by school administrators the previous day.

Estimates from the Schools Infection Survey of pupils testing positive for SARS-CoV-2 antibodies. Including breakdowns by age, sex and region where possible.

Characteristics of school-based persons with index cases of COVID-19 and close contacts from 103 K–12 schools, Greene and St. Louis Counties, Missouri, January 25–March 21, 2021.

1) Register is as of reporting date 2) Only includes schools and programs in Districts 1-32 and District 75 3) NYCEECs and District PreK Centers are excluded 4) District 75 Home and Hospital Instruction programs and students are excluded 5) Percents are of active students ages 5 and up, not of all students (any four year olds are exluded as they are not yet eligible for vaccination) 1) Enrollment as of last day of reporting period 2) Only schools and programs in Districts 1-32 and District 75 3) NYCEECs and District PreK Centers are excluded 4) District 75 Home and Hospital Instruction programs and students are excluded 5) For consent and consent withdrawal, only Covid-19 testing eligible students are included (Grades 1-12) 6) For unvaccinated population, only students aged 5 or above as of the day before the beginning of the reporting period are included "7) Under the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA), educational agencies and institutions reporting or releasing data derived from education records are responsible for protecting personally identifiable information (PII) in their reports from disclosure. a) If a cell is ≤ 5 the value is suppressed (""S""), and the next highest value in that row is also suppressed (""S""). b) If a cell is within 5 of the total number of students for the subgroup, the value is suppressed (""T""), and the next highest value in that row is also suppressed (""T""). This is necessary, because it is a FERPA violation to disclose that no students in a subgroup were vaccinated. This report includes counts of unvaccinated students, therefore data suppression is necessary on the maximum values also." 8) An empty cell indicates that there are no students for that grade or subgroup

A substantial fraction of k-12 schools in the United States closed their in-person operations during the COVID-19 pandemic. These closures may have altered the labor supply decisions of parents of affected children due to a need to be at home with children during the school day. In this paper, we examine the impact of school closures on parental labor market outcomes. We test whether COVID-19 school closures have a disproportionate impact on parents of school-age children (ages 5-17 years old). Our results show that both women’s and men’s work lives were affected by school closures, with both groups seeing a reduction in work hours and the likelihood of working full-time but only women being less likely to work at all. We also find that closures had a corresponding negative effect on the earnings of parents of school-aged children. These effects are concentrated among parents without a college degree and parents working in occupations that do not lend themselves to telework, suggesting that such individuals had a more difficult time adjusting their work lives to school closures.

Percentage of pupils in year 3 who participated in all tests who passed all tests for the subject test in Swedish and Swedish as a second language, municipal schools, (%). Due to Covid-19, no tests were carried out for year 3 in 2020 or 2021, so no data are available for the years. Data is available according to gender breakdown.

Full edition for scientific use. The survey aimed at collecting representative data of Austrian schools. A stratified sampling approach was used. Parents were asked to state their personal attitudes towards the self-administred coronavirus testing scheme used in Austrian schools, as well as describe the use of the testing scheme by their children.

The SARS-CoV-2 epidemic continues to have major impacts on children's education, with schools required to implement infection control measures that have led to long periods of absence and classroom closures. We have developed an agent-based epidemiological model of SARS-CoV-2 transmission that allows us to quantify projected infection patterns within primary school classrooms, and related uncertainties; the basis of our approach is a contact model constructed using random networks, informed by structured expert judgment. The effectiveness of mitigation strategies is considered in terms of effectiveness at suppressing infection outbreaks and limiting pupil absence. Covid-19 infections in schools in the UK in Autumn 2020 are re-examined and the model used for forecasting infection levels in autumn 2021, as the more infectious Delta-variant was emerging and school transmission was thought likely to play a major role in an incipient new wave of the epidemic. Our results are in good agreement with available data and indicate that testing-based surveillance of infections in the classroom population with isolation of positive cases is a more effective mitigation measure than bubble quarantine both for reducing transmission in primary schools and for avoiding pupil absence, even accounting for the insensitivity of self-administered tests. Bubble quarantine entails large numbers of pupils being absent from school, with only a modest impact on classroom infection levels. However, maintaining a reduced contact rate within the classroom can have a major beneficial impact on managing Covid-19 in school settings.

BackgroundCOVID-19 testing is critical for identifying cases to prevent transmission. COVID-19 self-testing has the potential to increase diagnostic testing capacity and to expand access to hard-to-reach areas in low-and-middle-income countries. We investigated the feasibility and acceptability of COVID-19 self-sampling and self-testing using SARS-CoV-2 Antigen-Rapid Diagnostic Tests (Ag-RDTs).MethodsFrom July 2021 to February 2022, we conducted a mixed-methods cross-sectional study examining self-sampling and self-testing using Standard Q and Panbio COVID-19 Ag Rapid Test Device in Urban and rural Blantyre, Malawi. Health care workers and adults (18y+) in the general population were non-randomly sampled.ResultsOverall, 1,330 participants were enrolled of whom 674 (56.0%) were female and 656 (54.0%) were male with 664 for self-sampling and 666 for self-testing. Mean age was 30.7y (standard deviation [SD] 9.6). Self-sampling usability threshold for Standard Q was 273/333 (82.0%: 95% CI 77.4% to 86.0%) and 261/331 (78.8%: 95% CI 74.1% to 83.1%) for Panbio. Self-testing threshold was 276/335 (82.4%: 95% CI 77.9% to 86.3%) and 300/332 (90.4%: 95% CI 86.7% to 93.3%) for Standard Q and Panbio, respectively. Agreement between self-sample results and professional test results was 325/325 (100%) and 322/322 (100%) for Standard Q and Panbio, respectively. For self-testing, agreement was 332/333 (99.7%: 95% CI 98.3 to 100%) for Standard Q and 330/330 (100%: 95% CI 99.8 to 100%) for Panbio. Odds of achieving self-sampling threshold increased if the participant was recruited from an urban site (odds ratio [OR] 2.15 95% CI 1.44 to 3.23, P < .01. Compared to participants with primary school education those with secondary and tertiary achieved higher self-testing threshold OR 1.88 (95% CI 1.17 to 3.01), P = .01 and 4.05 (95% CI 1.20 to13.63), P = .02, respectively.ConclusionsOne of the first studies to demonstrate high feasibility and acceptability of self-testing using SARS-CoV-2 Ag-RDTs among general and health-care worker populations in low- and middle-income countries potentially supporting large scale-up. Further research is warranted to provide optimal delivery strategies of self-testing.

Data from a school-level randomized controlled trial (RCT) of the Double Check professional development model, focused on improving teachers' cultural responsivity and student engagement. Data were developed to evaluate the multi-component whole-school Double Check model, testing the combined impacts of school-wide data-based decision-making, along with staff professional development on culturally responsive practices, and classroom coaching using the Double Check version of the Classroom Check-up. Detailed descriptions of this model and intervention activities can be found in Bradshaw et al (2018; a description of the model from a prior trial) and Pas et al (2022; analysis of intervention activities from the present trial). A total of 41 middle school from two states in the mid-Atlantic region of the United States participated. Schools were recruited to participate in four cohorts. The first school-years of participation for these cohorts were 2015-2016, 2016-2017, 2017-2018, and 2018-2019, respectively. Teacher recruitment sessions were generally held in the weeks leading up to beginning of the school year (during faculty professional development days). A total of 352 teachers consented to participate in the RCT. Following Fall baseline data collection for each of the four cohorts, schools were randomly assigned to receive the Double Check model (n = 19) or to the comparison group (n = 22; i.e., business as usual). Recruited schools were assigned into paired matches within their cohort based on their school-level demographic characteristics and baseline data; one school in each pair was randomly assigned to each group to ensure balance across conditions. Intervention activities took place during the first year of each school's participation in the trial. During year 2, intervention schools also received two professional development “booster” sessions. These sessions reviewed the Double Check model and components of culturally responsive teaching, and facilitated action planning for the second academic year for teachers’ implementation of culturally responsive strategies. Data collection occurred at baseline (pre-test; Fall of year 1), post-test (Spring of year 1), and follow-up (Spring of year 2). Data from all cohorts and time points are included in this submission. Follow-up data are missing for the fourth cohort of schools, as their follow-up time point coincided with Spring of 2020, when the COVID-19 pandemic interfered with data collection within schools. At the completion of the two years of participation (one intervention year, one follow up year for data collection), comparison schools received all Double Check PD materials and individual staff members received training in the coaching model.

The disparate impact of COVID-19 on student learning gains across students’ household income and parental education levels–no additional controls.

Survey of staff and students at the University of Edinburgh related to their participation in a routine, asymptomatic Covid-19 workplace testing pilot. 522 participants completed a pilot survey in April 2021 and 1,750 completed the main survey (November 2021). Surveys explored: the acceptability of regular PCR testing among students and staff, particularly involving an approach that was less invasive than nasopharyngeal swabbing; barriers and facilitators to participating in a regular university testing programme, including in the context of other testing methods being available; and whether participation in such a programme changed adherence to public health guidelines.