School Reopening Plan Concerns

RESPONSE and ACTION NEEDED

This petition outlines the concerns of the community and other stakeholders for BRSSD’s plan for return to school. 

Collectively Belmont Redwood Shores students, teachers, families, and staff are mourning the loss of school and community as we once experienced them together. We are eager to return to normal, to once again engage in face-to-face teaching and learning. Yet, because health restrictions limit how many students can be on campus, we must choose between two instructional models: hybrid, 50% in person learning with 50% independent study or 50% distance learning with 50% independent study. 

While in person learning offers the obvious appeal of enabling students to return to campus part-time, we must first ask some critical questions: Will the quality of in person instruction be stronger than synchronous distance learning? Will it increase meaningful connections and improve mental health for students? Does it merit the investment of resources, while justifying the risk of disease?

Concern #1: Loss of Instructional Time

Instructional Minutes represent the amount of time that students are guaranteed access to their education.

In the 7/23/20 Board presentation, total instructional minutes are not clearly defined when comparing 50% in-person versus distance learning models. The proposed blended format is neither student centered nor does it optimize student learning. 

Furthermore, hybrid models that limit class sizes will be inefficient, as they inherently cut back direct instruction by 50%. For example, if teachers are limited to teaching 12-15 students at a time instead of 24-30, they would need to repeat the same lesson plan twice for a single class. Not only can this be an inefficient use of teachers’ time, but it also carries the significant cost of reducing the number of instructional minutes that students access.

From an equity perspective, at-risk students historically also tend to struggle more with independent work completion. Models that rely heavily on students engaging in independent work from home without the supportive presence of their teachers may further widen existing achievement gaps.

Position Statement: The district needs to clearly define instructional minutes and explain educational opportunities for each model prior to asking parents to make selections for their student(s).

Concern #2: Absence of a Defined Plan for Distance Learning

The BRSSD Distance Learning Plan requires more development. Information thus far has been poorly communicated, resulting in widespread confusion and misunderstanding; more input from community stakeholders is desperately needed. 

SB98 provides guidance to schools for  “daily live interaction with certificated employees and peers for purposes of instruction, progress monitoring, and maintaining school connectedness.”  (Ed. Code, § 43503(b).) 

This is required unless it is not feasible. With hybrid models, daily live interaction is impossible because teachers cannot simultaneously teach students both in-person and remotely. However, daily live interaction with teachers IS possible with distance learning models. Yet for unclear reasons, the current proposed distance learning model needlessly cuts back students’ access to direct instruction by over 50%. 

The majority of Bay Area schools have adopted a 100% distance learning for all students to start the 2020-21 school year. BRSSD is denying the option of 100% distance learning for our students by only offering families the option of a 50% distance learning with a 50% independent study model.

Position Statement: BRSSD is denying our students access to their education when it IS possible to provide them with direct core course instruction everyday in a 100% distance learning model. This violates SB98 guidance. 

Concern # 3: Home School Stability 

Needless school disruptions negatively impact students' social emotional wellbeing when they become disconnected from their peers which, in turn, negatively impacts students' learning. Students will learn best when grouped with other students which they are familiar. 

Success in school is often built on strong collaboration between the school administration, teachers and parents. When students change schools it makes it challenging for all parties involved to build strong relationships. The pandemic is causing a huge educational disruption already. BRSSD should not transfer a student to a new school during this time as a penalty for whichever educational model their family chooses. To do so is both harmful and unethical. If the district must choose between moving a staff member to a new school vs. moving a group of students to a new school, they must prioritize the needs of students by keeping them at their home school. 

Position Statement: The district must guarantee to families that students can remain at their current schools for the 2020-21 school year, and to prioritize stability when grouping students and assigning teachers. 

Concern #4: Educational Model Mobility

As COVID-19 cases continue to soar throughout the Bay Area, it is more a question of WHEN and not IF our schools will need to close. In the past week, San Mateo County has been on the verge of making the Governor’s “watch list,” which would automatically force schools to close. In fact, as of July 24, 2020, all Bay Area counties except for San Mateo County are already on the watch list. 

Position Statement: Given that schools in our county will likely shut down at some point this fall, BRSSD should invest its resources toward preparing teachers to deliver rigorous online instruction instead of forcing a hybrid model that will likely be shut down soon. 

 

Additional Comments/Concerns:

It should be noted that with a distance learning model, we could still build in opportunities for students to come to campus as the need arises. For example, a distance learning schedule could potentially incorporate on-campus supports for specific populations (e.g. English Learners,, younger grades (K-1), students with IEP’s, students with access limitations, etc.).

One of the strongest arguments that can be made in favor of in-person learning is that it helps promote connection and community. While this is certainly true in a traditional school setting, the stringent safety measures required for in-person learning could end up making school feel like a stale, cold, almost dystopian experience. After waiting in long lines to take their temperature, students will be greeted not by a warm smile or touch, but by adults repeatedly warning them to stay 6 feet apart from their friends. When they look around the classroom, they may have little idea what their peers might be thinking or feeling, with faces hidden behind masks. Students may go through the day without seeing a single smile. Instead, their limited hours at school will be marked by relentless reminders that they must stay ever vigilant against a deadly virus.

Students' most connecting experiences often occur during recess, lunch, open time, and extracurricular activities. Most of these opportunities will now be stripped down due to safety restrictions. Because synchronized online courses can meet more frequently, ironically they offer more time to connect. Distance learning can provide a safe space for teachers to facilitate community using technology, such as Zoom breakout rooms. Teachers will have the ability to support group work, visit chat rooms, answer questions, and give feedback in real time.

 

A/B Days 50% Distance Learning or In Person/50% Distance Learning

Average frequency of connection: 2 to 3 days per week (Total 9.5* hours/week)

100% Distance Learning

Average frequency of connection: 5 days per week (Up to 20 hours/week)

Ultimately, physical presence in itself does not automatically equate to engagement and community. One must consider the quality of that presence. Is it possible that daily connections with others virtually might be at least as beneficial as less frequent contact in person -- especially when you can actually see others’ faces and exchange ideas without an awkward, anxious space in between? Furthermore, are we not resourceful enough that we can establish other creative means of helping students connect? Given the proper resources, intentional community building and social-emotional learning can very well be built into distance learning models. 

Will the in-person model be an effective use of resources?

In-person learning models carry a high and perhaps hidden overhead cost, in that they ultimately strip time away from the essential work of delivering high-caliber instruction -- the core mission of school itself. It’s late July, we should prioritize our limited time and resources. Would it be wiser to dedicate this time toward thoughtful development of a strong online learning system, or will we devote our energy toward overhauling the existing structures of our school in order to accommodate a physical return to campus? 

Will blended learning be the most efficient use of our time and energy? 
Reopening schools safely will require a huge lift in terms of time spent planning and modifying existing systems:

District and site administrators must take on the entirely unfamiliar role of becoming experts in disease prevention measures, coordinating the execution of an extensive list of CA COVID-19 Industry Guidelines in order to reopen. 
Administrators will need to enforce consequences to breaches in safety rules, and mitigate concerns that arise as teachers and students become infected.
Teachers will need to restructure their curriculum in order to accommodate the drastic reduction in direct instructional minutes, while also learning to juggle between in-person and online learning. 

Is returning to school a financially sound idea? 
Our school district is facing an impending budget deficit. Distance learning would reduce facilities cost significantly that could be re-invested in curricular development.

Schools closed to students would cut down on utilities and facility maintenance costs.
Less money would be needed to fund disinfection and protective equipment, or to increase staffing for sanitization, symptom monitoring and contact tracing systems. 

Will efforts to reopen schools ultimately detract from our ability to offer quality distance learning if a resurgence occurs?
Infectious disease experts have warned that a new resurgence of outbreaks is likely to occur with the coming flu & cold season. Consider recent events in South Korea and France, where hundreds of schools had to close just days after reopening. Would it not be more strategic to start the school year with a strong and consistent distance learning model, in the plausible event that schools will need to close again?

Although the current proposal makes it seem as if schools can seamlessly flow back and forth between blended and distance learning, the reality is that such transitions will likely be disruptive and detrimental. Although distance learning is neither ideal nor perfect, in the midst of this global crisis, it offers simplicity, predictability and stability -- all of which ultimately benefit our students.

Which educational model best guarantees student and staff health and safety?

Per San Mateo County Health data, the reality is that active transmission of COVID-19 continues to occur daily in our community, at a rate that is rapidly increasing despite widespread closures. Until a cure or vaccine is broadly available, it is misleading to tell families that it is “safe” for their children to return to school. One can only say that there is a lower or higher risk of disease transmission at any given moment; safety is not a promise that can be guaranteed with any authenticity. 

For better or worse, the decisions that we make today will have a direct impact on the health and safety of students and school employees, and their families. New research indicates that COVID-19 poses not merely a threat of death, but also debilitating long-term illness and permanent cardiovascular damage -- including for young or otherwise healthy patients (see Washington Post or SF Chronicle articles, or the latest Atlantic article on how COVID-19 is lasting several months for thousands). If someday, students or staff end up suffering lifelong health impairments as a direct result of contracting COVID-19 at school, will we be able to look back and say it was all worth it?

BRSSD teachers expressed a preference for distance learning over the proposed hybrid model. As the experts in their field, we would hope that teachers’ perspectives in determining the best options for student learning would be acknowledged and valued. 

Within our schools, our teachers are arguably our greatest asset. If we are to ask the majority of them to come into school against their wishes, we would hope that the benefits would far outweigh the risks. If we are to ask them to put not only their own health at risk, but also that of their partners, their children, and their loved ones, we would hope that in-person learning is an absolutely necessary cost that cannot be avoided in order for students to access quality education. Yet is it truly essential? Is there evidence that it will even be superior, from an instructional or mental health perspective? We feel the answer is “no.”

In summary, a 100% distance learning model (not the proposed 50% distance 50% Independent study) can effectively offer live, interactive instruction 5 days a week. This will increase access to direct instruction, enable teachers to fully focus on developing quality online curriculum, and ensure safety for staff and students. An in-person hybrid model is unlikely to increase social connectedness in ways we would hope, and poorly allocates precious educational funding and resources. We will end up risking the lives of many in exchange for poorer quality education. 

For the reasons stated above, we petition the BRSSD Board of Trustees to reopen schools to a daily synchronous distance learning model this Fall 2020, in order to maximize both learning and safety for all.