We, the undersigned, respectfully ask that Fairfield School District Board Members offer a full-time in-class learning option (5 days a week) as part of the Fall 2020 school reopening while our COVID-19 numbers remain in the “Low Risk” category.  The proposed hybrid (part-time in class) and full-time distance learning options do not adequately meet the needs and address the differing views of all families in the district. We feel the needs of the family with working parents are being forgotten.  Some families believe the risk of harm to their children is significantly greater in a hybrid or full remote learning setting compared to a full time in class school model.  We believe all three options: full-time in class, full-time distance learning and hybrid should also be offered to meet the needs of all families.

The American Association of Pediatricians (“AAP”) recently issued a statement supporting this viewpoint. The AAP strongly recommends that schools reopen for full time in classroom instruction in the fall. In our opinion, parents should be given the option to weigh the various risks and make the decision that is best for their family. Full time in classroom instruction will be offered by other Connecticut school districts including other districts in Fairfield County area.

In the full-time option, children would attend school full time in cohorts of the same size as the hybrid model which allows the appropriate social distancing, and would not mix with any children in other cohorts. This reduces the risk of disease spread and limits teacher exposure to the same number of students as the hybrid model. Other risk mitigating techniques (masks, hand washing, etc.) would also be followed as outlined by the AAP and public health officials. 

The below factors support the decision to provide an option for full time in person instruction:

• Any amount of remote learning exposes children to increased risk of harm to their mental, emotional and physical well-being. Social isolation could increase risk of suicide in children and teens and could make it more difficult to identify and address issues such as substance use and depression. Remote learning also increases screen time, the effects of which on brain development are not known. Parents should have the ability to weigh the health risks posed by distance learning against the risk of possible exposure to COVID-19. It should be noted that the AAP states that COVID-19 does not typically cause severe symptoms in children.

• Offering a full time in classroom option would not significantly increase the risk of community spread or increase exposure to the virus for teachers - (a) in the hybrid model, each teacher will be exposed to all students across the rotating groups, resulting in similar exposure for the teacher and students as a full time in person model with cohorts of students. In the full time model, this cohort of students would not intermingle with other students outside the cohort, (b) The AAP statement notes that research shows children appear to be less likely to be infected by the virus and are also less likely to spread it, which seems to be even more true for younger kids in elementary school age brackets, (c) 3 feet social distancing is recommended by public health experts when it is not feasible to maintain greater distance, and the small incremental gain in maintaining 6 feet of distance must be weighed against the increased known harm caused by preventing children from attending school, (d) the greater community at large is no longer sheltering in place (outside of school many kids and parents are co-mingling with others in a variety of public locations including work, daycare settings, camps, extended family visits, play dates, and stores. Many parents work outside the home or will be required to return to work soon as businesses reopen).

• Distance learning compromises the quality of education and results in severe inequities depending on family circumstances and resources. This is not about childcare as some people suggest; it is about education. Most parents, nannies and babysitters have no training in teaching and generally are not qualified to teach children. Remote learning is simply not feasible or effective for many, particularly for younger children where most of their education centers on social/emotional development and requires in-class instruction, as well as for children with special needs. In addition, some families simply do not have the physical space in their homes to ensure all family members have a quiet space in which to work and learn. Studies show that remote learning is significantly less effective than in classroom instruction. New research suggests that by September, most students will have fallen behind where they would have been if they had stayed in classrooms, with some losing the equivalent of a full school year’s worth of academic gains. Younger children are missing out on building a strong foundation in concepts like phonics and elementary math that prepare them for a lifetime of learning and working. An option for full time in person public school education ensures equal opportunity to a quality education for all students, which is a fundamental principal of public K-12 education.

• Any amount of remote learning places unreasonable demands on some families. For many families, any amount of virtual at-home remote learning is simply not an option - (a) homes where both parents work full time, (b) students with special needs, (c) younger children (K-5) where virtual online learning is unsuccessful (particularly for parents who work either in or out of the house), (d) families with a single working parent, and (e) families with multiple children in different grades.  In these situations, parents may be unable to provide the support students need to succeed at distance learning. This is not about childcare. 

• Distance learning negatively impacts the economy and increases unemployment as many parents are unable to return to work if they must home school their children. Families and children will suffer significant hardship caused by a weak economy and higher unemployment.

We expect that many will rightfully choose full time remote learning or the hybrid option, reducing the number of students who choose to return full time. Those who choose full time remote learning could be matched with full time remote teachers, providing opportunities for remote teaching assignments for teachers in high risk health categories. Teachers who prefer to teach in the classroom full time could be matched with a cohort of full time students and would not have to offer distance learning. 

We appreciate the Board’s commitment to hear the needs of our community and to provide the best educational opportunities for all of our children and families.