Yesterday the SDUHSD Board had a regularly scheduled meeting at Earl Warren Middle School. There were a few items on the agenda, but the big one for us was a potential back-to-school option.
I had a motion prepared to submit for Board action that has us going back to school starting on the first day of the Third Quarter. We all know the main points of this plan because we've talked about them many times.
A Concurrent Learning Model where teachers teach from the classroom to students in the classroom, while also broadcasting their lessons over the internet to students at home. Parents and students can choose to attend in person or remain in distance learning at their discretion.
All in-person learning at school would follow all the components of our safety plan, including mask wearing, improved hygiene, minimum social distancing, etc.
Teachers with medical and child care issues would be allowed to teach from home.
And other details we have discussed many times.
I went into the meeting highly confident that this motion would pass and we would finally see a path to in-person education.
Instead, at noon the State of California dropped new "guidance" about returning to school. There were rumors floating around that the California Teachers Association in Sacramento had gotten to the policy makers in the Governor's office and convinced them to submit to the teachers unions demands to not allow certain schools to open, even in a part-time and hybrid model, and even if they have an acceptable safety plan that meets all of the state safety guidelines. Those rumors proved to be true.
The new State Guidelines are as confusing as ever and will take a few days to understand, but some things were quickly apparent, including:
1. Schools like our SDUHSD schools that did not offer in-person learning to all students (hybrid / concurrent is OK) in at least one full grade level would not be deemed to have been "open" before the County slipped into the purple tier in November. Small cohorts like we had do not qualify as "open". This is important because if you weren't "open" back when San Diego county is in the red tier, you will not be allowed to reopen until we go back to the red tier.
2. Although we can have small cohorts, the size of the cohorts will be limited, and those cohorts will not be able to change classrooms.
There are a lot more details, such as adding a requirement to have a minimum of 4 feet between student desks, and a bunch more, but the main takeaway (so far) is that we cannot open while we are in the purple tier.
This is clearly more than disappointing. Our State Government changed the rules yet again, and usurped the power from what should be a local decision (based on local conditions, individual district health and safety plans, the local constituents of taxpayers, teachers, students, parents, etc.) and consolidated the power at the State level. This is purely a political decision to appease the Teachers Union, who has other objectives than to actually teach our kids.
Make no mistake about this, it is NOT about public health. This is important because the Teachers Union and the Government will attempt to spin it that way, but it is NOT about public health. It has nothing to do with stopping the spread of the virus, and everything to do with appeasing the Teachers union as payback for a long history of political support, and to cement future political support. Others can comment on that issue, but it is not a well kept secret.
How do I know it is NOT about public health? Because of the rules that if you HAVE been open, you can stay open, but if you HAVE NOT been open, then you can't open.
Imagine if they applied this rule to restaurants. If you are open for indoor dining, you can remain open, but if you aren't open then you can't open. What might open mean? If you took indoor reservations we consider you open. If you did't take reservations, then you weren't really "open". Those of you open, keep serving indoor meals, that is fine. Nothing to do with public health.
Or, if you were a gym. If you were open for indoor yoga classes, then you can expand to include the weight room. But if you were being safer, and had outdoor yoga classes in the back lot, then you weren't really open and can't open. Going slower and safer is penalized, much like we are being penalized for not being more aggressive in our school opening back in the fall.
If the State were really concerned about public health, they would have a much more straightforward rule. Schools need to close when the average daily infection rate exceeds 30, or 50, or 70 new infections per day per 100,000 population. Something like that. Why do they bifurcate schools into open and closed, with a stupid, legalistic, technical definition of what it means to be open?
That is clearly a political calculus. Could you imagine if they attempted to close the schools in Orange County that have been open for months, with the parents and students currently realizing the benefits of in-person education and no significant virus spread? The State could not risk the political backlash. This is not about public health, this is about bowing to the teachers union as best as the State can.
In any case, the important question going forward is - what do we do in SDUHSD?
First, the lawyers and the administration will be plowing through the guidance to fully understand our options, but trust me they aren't good. We will have a review in a few days, and another Board meeting is scheduled for next Thursday.
As a practical matter, it is unlikely that we will be able to open unless we have a good legal case and decide to open anyway, and let the Teachers Union take us to court. Not a quick or pleasant process, and we will not likely get cooperation from our own teachers union.
We can try to expand our cohorts, but these rules have been tightened as well. The State actually wants us to keep high school cohorts intact throughout the school day.
Think of it this way. Suppose Period 1 is 25 students in AP calculus. Then in Period 2 what happens? Some are scheduled to go to english, some to history, some to cooking, whatever. But no, they aren't allowed to move, so the teacher needs to come to them. But which teacher? The State suggests you find those students that have AP Calculus AND english AND history, with the same teachers, and have them as a cohort. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to see that is a logistical nightmare and just won't work without having, for example, a history teacher trying to teach chemistry. Good luck with that.
But not to worry, the State has a brilliant suggestion. Just have one class at a time until you are done, them move on to the next class. For example, have your AP Calculus class only be AP calculus - all day every day until you are done. Cram an entire quarter course into a couple of full time weeks. Then move on to the next class. As you think about it you will see that this also is completely unworkable.
So I'm afraid we are going backwards. Distance learning will likely continue, baring the decision to go against the guidance and sue in court, which may mean we don't have many teachers.
This also means that we will probably have to go back to the prior agreed plan to have all the teachers report to school and teach from their classrooms with no or few students present.
There is no need to offer the accommodation to teach from home any more for vulnerable teachers, since most of them won't have any students in the classrooms due to the reopening restrictions and therefore there is no real risk of catching the virus. They can simply be instructed to avoid going within six feet of anyone at any time, but at least they will be in their familiar classroom environment and will be working on campus, full time. For the few that will have small cohorts of students in their class, we can still offer a teach-from-home accommodation for those that need it, but it will be much fewer teachers due to the inability for us to bring more than a few students on campus.
The only other hope we have is to get the rules changed, once yet again, through lobbying, protesting, and the usual political maneuverings. I wouldn't count on success any time soon.
I'm open to suggestions. I will always speak the truth, and will always put the interests of parents and students first. It is a shame that others in our District and our State have other priorities, but that is the world we find ourselves in.