Not arguing about the sentiment - but online learning is not a new thing - at least in NSW.  Many students have traditionally done distance learning. The difference now is not the content but the scaling up of the network. That was done at the end of last term and during the holidays.    

@ bluebird

"Nearly 30 per cent of all locally-acquired infections may have been spread by community transmission, up from 19 per cent three weeks ago, the latest government data shows.

This brings the number of confirmed cases acquired by community transmission — meaning authorities have been unable to identify the source of infection — to more than 640, nationally."

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2020-03-17/coronavirus-cases-data-reveals-how-covid-19-spreads-in-australia/12060704

@ bluebird

"Nearly 30 per cent of all locally-acquired infections may have been spread by community transmission, up from 19 per cent three weeks ago, the latest government data shows.

This brings the number of confirmed cases acquired by community transmission — meaning authorities have been unable to identify the source of infection — to more than 640, nationally."

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2020-03-17/coronavirus-cases-data-reveals-how-covid-19-spreads-in-australia/12060704

If there were invisible and rampant outbreaks we were not aware of they would have occurred weeks ago. 

Gee, who’d have thought? Shut the borders and the % of community transmission goes up. So if we have only 2 cases in the next week and they’re both from community transmission that’ll be 100%. So we’d better keep the lockdown because community transmission is on the rise? Is that your point?
Never ceases to amaze how the media uses statistics to scare the masses.
A shame we don’t see any headlines like “Serious cases fall by 30% in the past week!”

The number of community acquired cases (source not known) 3 weeks ago was 142, as of yesterday it was 642.  Up until the suppression strategy was enforced on 3 April it had grown to 471 cases having increased by 329 in 6 days.  Under the suppression strategy the growth has been slowed with an increase of 171 in 15 days.  NSW with 347 cases (up from about 25 cases 4 weeks ago) and Vic with 136 cases (up from 6 cases 3 weeks ago) are the main regions contributing to the total of community acquired Covid 19.

Using the word "grow" is deceptive because we didn't go from 1 case to 6000. Independent and unrelated cases counted together can not be used to determine growth

It wasn't that long ago that 1 in every 250 people with the Coronavirus was an Australian who just happened to be overseas in the wrong place at the wrong. What was actually happening was people in hard hit areas had seen the long queues in the medical system and what the governments response was so they figured they had a better chance in Australia

The ratio of overseas to known to community has remained constant. An increase in overseas over the last 3 weeks saw an increase in community over the last 3 weeks

Also don't forget this virus is invisible for 2 weeks so the data you have at any point in time is a description of the situation 2 weeks ago. You cant tie policy implemented on a particular date to cases reported on a particular date and draw a conclusion. Particularly as the majority of cases were caught in countries that didn't have those policies in place so a correlation cant be drawn

If you put every overseas case in the first column of an excel spreadsheet (A1 to A4000) and then put related cases in the second column you would have a much better picture of what is happening then simply adding unrelated cases together and calling it growth because they reported on the same day

The 2 week delay is not correct.  Infection can take as little as 2 days up to 10 days+ and symptoms can show over a similar period or hardly at all in 80% of cases.

The number of community acquired cases (source not known) 3 weeks ago was 142, as of yesterday it was 642.  Up until the suppression strategy was enforced on 3 April it had grown to 471 cases having increased by 329 in 6 days.  Under the suppression strategy the growth has been slowed with an increase of 171 in 15 days.  NSW with 347 cases (up from about 25 cases 4 weeks ago) and Vic with 136 cases (up from 6 cases 3 weeks ago) are the main regions contributing to the total of community acquired Covid 19.

Some states have this week begun targeted testing to identify the spread on community acquired Covid 19.  It will be interesting to see any trend that develops from the increased testing.

PS.  The increase in the number of cases up to 3 April also reflects cases that were transferred from "under investigation" to "locally acquired source not known".

PPS.  It looks as if 80+ cases were transferred across from "under investigation" in those first 6 days.

3 weeks ago most of the testing was ‘targeted’ at people in contact with overseas travellers. In the last 3 weeks the numbers of people returning from overseas has dwindled so the hundreds of thousands of tests have been focused elsewhere .... and surprise surprise when you test more you find more.
2,200 targeted tests in Queensland yesterday resulted in 7 positives. 

The split of cases on 28 March was:-
Overseas acquired - 2,456 (67.5%)
Local known - 691 (19%)
Local unknown - 231 (6.3%)
Under investigation - 257 (8.1%)

On April 17:-
Overseas acquired - 4,209 (64.5%)
Local known - 1,624 (24.9%)
Local unknown - 642 (9.8%)
Under investigation - 40 (0.7%)

Sorry but that's still deceptive. 3 weeks ago there were a lot of under investigation cases but there was more of an effort to find the source.

To get a truer picture you have to combine the unknown with under investigation and see that this has dropped from 14.4% in March to 10.5% in April. It is also worth looking at the change in figures from March to April

Total      2,880
Overseas acquired      1,753      61%
Local known      933      32%
Combined      194      7%
Local unknown      411      14%
Under investigation      -217      -8%

So under investigation has dropped and Local unknown has predictably increased. But the overseas and linked cases still make up 93% of the change from March to April

Adding the "under investigation" to the "unknown" gives a totally false picture.  The "under investigation" was split between the two local categories as it shows by both kicking up on the graph as it was distributed to the correct category.

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2020-03-17/coronavirus-cases-data-reveals-how-covid-19-spreads-in-australia/12060704 

The point still remains that when more of an effort was put into finding the source that both categories increased

Yes local unknown went from 6% to 10% but local known went from 19% to 25%. We just went from not knowing 8% of the infection source to knowing the infection source. The ratios have still largely held consistent. If there was community transmission running rampant then we would have seen a drastic change in the ratios

Instead all we have seen as Clockwork Orange rightfully pointed out is less people returning from overseas offset against the trickle in community transmission we have come to expect

That there is an increase in community transmission source unknown means that vigilance needs to be maintained as there is the potential for breakout and fast spread if the wrong restrictions are removed in the wrong location in fact as NW Tassie has shown there is the chance for a significant breakout with the current restrictions.  I would expect that the last to have restrictions eased will be NSW and Vic with SA and NT being the trial regions.

Is anywhere publishing data on serious/critical cases e.g. new cases and recovered.  In the past 2 weeks we’ve gone from around 90+ down to 57 cases. But I can’t tell if this is 33 recovered and no new cases, or 25 recovered and 8 dead, or all recovered and 57 new serious cases.
it would also be interesting to know how many (if any) under the age of say 60 have actually been in a serious/critical condition.

Is anywhere publishing data on serious/critical cases e.g. new cases and recovered.  In the past 2 weeks we’ve gone from around 90+ down to 57 cases. But I can’t tell if this is 33 recovered and no new cases, or 25 recovered and 8 dead, or all recovered and 57 new serious cases.
it would also be interesting to know how many (if any) under the age of say 60 have actually been in a serious/critical condition.

Is anywhere publishing data on serious/critical cases e.g. new cases and recovered.  In the past 2 weeks we’ve gone from around 90+ down to 57 cases. But I can’t tell if this is 33 recovered and no new cases, or 25 recovered and 8 dead, or all recovered and 57 new serious cases.
it would also be interesting to know how many (if any) under the age of say 60 have actually been in a serious/critical condition.

https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/

https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/country/australia/

https://www.health.gov.au/news/health-alerts/novel-coronavirus-2019-ncov-health-alert/coronavirus-covid-19-current-situation-and-case-numbers

Australia said case numbers recovered are unreliable because it is too much of a hassle to touch base with everybody and see if they have recovered. More of an attempt has been made in the last few days but still unreliable data

The COVID at a glance in the third link shows current cases in hospital and those in intensive care. You can piece together stats from the other 2 sites

Yeah, they’re the sites I’m looking at but you can’t tell much about the trend in serious/critical cases. You can track the downward trend but not if the trend is the result of lots of recoveries and some new serious cases or no new serious cases. Recoveries are any recoveries be they from mild or serious.

Education is an essential resource like police, fire, or hospital. Yet people seem to think "ZOMG!!! hundreds of kids associating with each other lets close it down!!!"

First of all our approach is pre-emptive rather than reactive. 3 new cases in total over night in Victoria, less than 200 kids Australia wide infected in total (and some no doubt overseas cases), only 2 or 3 news articles about kids at school with the infection. Yet most kids (well over 90%) are now learning from home

Secondly do you think online learning programs whipped together in 3 weeks are effective? What about disadvantaged kids, those with learning disabilities, kids from non supportive home environments, indigenous or kids from ethnic origins, etc.... Also how are kids supposed to replicate science labs, wood shops, electronics, home economics etc... from home? What about group learning or peer support?

People who look at school and thin it can be taken offline have never been. Our education system has become nothing more than a way for the privileged percent of kids to learn English and Maths. Paranoid parents who pulled their kids out of school and now want everyone to follow suit so their kid can get an education

I can understand a 4 week school shut down in hard hit regions at a strategic time. But a state wide shut down when we barely have a problem is only going to write off an entire term for every kid trying to study this year. And if people can get refunds for services they aren't paying for then what does that mean for money currently supporting our education system?

It would have been better for Australia to keep school holidays for another 2 weeks and extend the school term (last 2 weeks is prep for next year anyhow) than to implement learning from home. This can be managed through strict social distancing policies, rules of sending any kid who so much as sneezes home, and keeping teachers in the vulnerable age group at home. And since schools are local based enrolments any virus breakout would be local

I pity anybody child who wanted an education this year

A couple of things. Education is an essential service (in the long run). In the short run, we can adapt. It's horrendous. With the right resources and approaches, a few months interruption is no reason why a student reach their goals.

Also, I should have said - I think the government should have shut down schools. I agree with Professor Sharon Lewin from the Doherty Institute on that. Several weeks ago - so much was unknown and the government needed to scramble to increase ICU capacity, to acquire ventilators (or to have them produced), etc. The degree to which children are infectious was unknown (still is, I gather). At that point, there were too many unknowns and it was necessary to err on the side of caution (as Professor Lewin said).

Obviously, the closing of schools has varied from state and territory to state and territory. But perhaps you and I have common ground insofar as I think we're nearing the point where it would, in any case, be fine for schools to reopen (with the measures in place which you have mentioned). Since the necessary scrambling has taken place.

As you say, education is an essential service. The idea was never to keep schools closed forever. It was simply to buy time so as to avoid the situation that has occurred elsewhere in the world.