By Scott Smyers (originally posted September 8, 2020)
When the lockdowns began, we were all stunned and trusted that the local, state, and federal health officials knew what they were doing and were following a plan. After all, one of the primary purposes of the Center for Disease Control (CDC) is to prepare for any diseases, including viruses, known or unknown, and have a plan ready to implement. This plan should include effective communication to explain the facts to the effected populations including proposed actions to reduce the spread and risk to everyone. The good news is that they had plans in place for years, most recently updated in 2017. The bad news is that they did not recommend lockdowns except for the most vulnerable or wearing masks (except for the symptomatic). The politicians at every level overreacted and the media encouraged it the entire time and we’re all paying for it. It is time we rethink the self-imposed lockdowns and question those who recommend them vigorously and emotionally. Please read the Community Mitigation Guidelines to Prevent Pandemic Influenza — United States, 2017 for yourself. Increased testing is not going to be the “silver bullet” to save the day. There are questionable results from labs (reports of people receiving positive results after not actually been tested) and high false negative rates and all over the country, Which Test is Best.
Private schools are opening all around us with in-person learning. Public schools in other states are opening with in-person learning because the curve has been flattened. Furthermore, other public schools nearby Acton and Boxborough are offering 5 days of instruction (Bedford, Westford and Concord Carlisle). Every day counts. How far will the ABRSD allow our students to fall behind before reconsidering our options?
One variable that is important to consider when planning for reopening, is that a substantial number of families will not allow their children to return, even when the Governor and DESE authorize full reopening. Some of these people certainly have legitimate reasons with susceptible family members, etc. Others are psychologically unprepared to accept we will return to “normal” any time soon and have likely passed this sentiment onto their children. I expect the voluntary prolonged opt-out is likely to be on average about 20% based on the numbers we have seen commit to-date, although there is a bias based on time with this interpretation, thus hard to know for sure. If we presume that when schools open, they are at 80% capacity, that gives us more room to space out students, but still provide a very close to normal and efficient learning experience.
All I am suggesting is that when the reports come in that other schools have opened without incidents of COVID among the students and the surrounding community, we should act rapidly to get the students back into school. If I’m wrong, we can proceed with the status quo (planning for prolonged lockdowns with more remote learning), but if I’m correct, the full reopening plan should be in the works now so students and teachers can get back to normal efficiently.
We will have to do without six-foot separation at every moment, over cleaning, lack of ventilation (AC and Heat) and other self-imposed requirements. Why is it that when parents ask the School Committee or Superintendent to push back on state mandates for high stakes standardized testing (MCAS) and federal control of our curriculum/frameworks (Common Core: as voted on at Special Town Meeting in 2015), they ignore the facts and claim they must follow state requirements or risk losing a little funding, but when it comes to state guidelines on re-opening, the Administrators know better than the State and impose even more barriers to reopening a functioning school? See this link for updated info from the Department of Elementary and Secondary Education DESE Press Release 09 03 2020 It appears these additional requirements are in line with the Massachusetts Teachers Association goal to not have to go back to any in-person teaching MTA COVID. These additional requirements will result in nothing more than making teachers and students uncomfortable with no heat or ventilation, overwork custodians, and overwhelm the administrators with complaints from disappointed parents.
Based on the MTA website, teachers have many concerns. This is understandable, especially for older teachers, or those with ongoing health issues (or if someone in their immediately family has health issues). We should make every accommodation for these individuals. As a group, however, many teachers are relatively young and healthy and are using this as an excuse to avoid work. For example, some teachers and a school committee member from Worcester have been exposed using COVID as an excuse while arrogantly posting their non-social distancing partying on social media, Worcester Tech Union Hack.
If we continue to resist opening the schools, the consequences will be severe for students, teachers, and families. No matter what the opening schedule, we are counting on teachers to be positive and inspirational guiding students through this challenge. Teachers know that students are coming back to school after having been influenced by their home life under lockdowns, where they may have been shielded from the bombardment of frightening news or perhaps their family has been directly affected by COVID and therefore, the student is hypersensitive to any COVID topics. Ideally, the teachers will focus on the subject matter and counselors (or other trained specialists) can provide the psychological support as needed.
Nimble is not a word we associate with town government or educational institutes. Yet, we NEED the individuals who make up the School Committee, Administrative Staff, Teachers and Counselors to be open to new information and ready to break from an online/hybrid routine and open schools to full capacity as soon as possible.
Leave a Reply