Board of Education Hybrid Reopening Work Session Recap: November 6, 2020

by David King

On Friday, November 6, the Board of Education met to discuss the Superintendent’s plan for a hybrid reopening model for the first time since plans for this semester were killed in August. What was frustrating to many, however, was how the plan presented to the Board was far from a polished model-- in fact, as we await the results from a massive county-wide parent survey, the plan is tentative and indefinite with little concrete substance. MCPS central office staff consistently emphasized throughout the meeting that they will need to hear back from each and every parent regarding how they would like to see their children educated in the upcoming second semester, and only after receiving this information could they apply their research on hypothetical models for education towards the development of a functional system. The possibility of individual schools never opening in person at all, models of instruction that could vary according to different needs across the county, and a world in which students are continuing their education for the year at an entirely different school - all of these and more are potential outcomes that will be considered following the conclusion of the parent survey (which will run from November 11th to December 3rd) and alongside the circumstances of the health metrics that Montgomery County Health Officer Travis Gayles has put in place for reopening.

The presentation of the plan began with a speech from Superintendent Jack Smith, who wished to remind a somewhat hostile community that MCPS is working as hard as possible to develop a safe reopening plan and that they are aware how difficult virtual learning has been for the social-emotional wellbeing of their students. Smith said that the county has been studying the models employed by school districts around the country and is communicating with MCPS staff in order to develop a substantive instructional model, noting that getting students back to the closest traditional instruction model as possible is the top priority for the county right now. Critics have argued that MCPS is being overly cautious. For months, concerned community members have pointed out that several other school districts have been able to reopen without significant upticks in Coronavirus transmissions in their communities, and argue that Montgomery County COVID metrics may be more restrictive than the national baseline. That being said, Montgomery County is one of the 50 most populous counties in the country, with well over a million residents, so our potential return to learning looks very different from some of the surrounding, smaller Maryland counties. 

MCPS has developed metrics for reopening, with the implementation of different phases depending on the Maryland Calculation Model for the 14-day average new case rate per 100,000 residents. Ideally, in order to resume “full” hybrid in-person instruction, this rate should be fewer than 5 cases per 100,000 residents per day on average. The plan for reopening would be scaled back vastly if the rate were between 5-10 new cases, and back further for a new-case rate from 10-15.  At higher than 15 cases per 100,000 residents, any plans for in-person instruction (which would already be practically nonexistent at this point) would be almost entirely delayed. To put these data into perspective, this number in Montgomery County has recently floated around an average of 13-15 new daily cases, down from a peak of 23.6 in May but significantly higher than the averages between 6-9 in August, when MCPS deemed their plan for hybrid reopening unsafe.

If, however, health metrics improve to the point where MCPS deems it safe to send students back into schools (or if health metrics change to allow this to come up), the plan for phasing students back into classrooms would look something like this: 

• If approved, MCPS would ideally bring all special education students back into school for a learning and needs assessment at three middle schools starting on December 3rd - Sligo, Julius West, and Hallie Wells. They would then begin a return to the classroom on January 12th, and there would be three phases for their reintroduction. 

• Starting with the second semester on February 1st, there would be another three-phased approach. In the first phase, we would bring back kindergarten/first grade, sixth grade, ninth grade, career and technology education (with an emphasis on 12th graders), and special education students. In the second phase, that list would expand to include prekindergarten, grades two and three, grade seven, and grade ten. Finally, in the third phase we would look to bring back fourth and fifth grade, eighth grade, and eleventh and twelfth grade. 

SMOB Nick Asante and Rebecca Smondrowski (District 2) both raised concerns about this seeming lack of consideration for upperclassmen, especially seniors. The phased approach will therefore be re-evaluated. Again, timelines for how long this would all take are unknown, pending the data from the massive parent survey MCPS will push out next week.

Once a return to hybrid learning does occur, there are different models for how it might look that MCPS has developed - specifically, the support model and the simultaneous model. The support model involves a scenario in which students remain enrolled in their current virtual classes while small “cohorts” of students, numbering up to fifteen at a time, may return to in-person learning. These students would generally stay together for safety purposes, keeping their circle of contact small. This model relies on a continuance of virtual education as the main instruction in MCPS schools. The simultaneous model involves teachers instructing both in-person and virtual students at the same time, a model that has raised concerns by teachers, parents, and students alike about the quality and equity of education likely to come from it. This model would see a concept known as “team teaching” employed, in which there is a teacher for the class in person as well as a supporting teacher or other staffer working virtually to handle the chat and facilitate engagement. This model allows a much more expansive in-person education, allows some teachers to stay home, and allows students to remain connected to their teacher all week long - potentially allowing for expanded classroom hours, which have lagged severely this year compared to a traditional school year. In either situation, MCPS will need to hire additional staff, drawing especially from these identified areas: recent college graduates, retirees, substitute teachers who hold a bachelor’s degree, virtual teachers who live out of state, and paraeducators (provided that they are not expected to have a role in the classroom that they are educationally unqualified for). Of course, these models are still up in the air. Neither one is likely to be rolled out county-wide, as MCPS intends to shape the model for virtual learning on a school-by-school basis according to the data they receive through the parent survey about the needs of each individual community.

Knowing that virtual learning is not and cannot be for everyone, MCPS provides families the full opportunity to opt their children out of in-person learning at any time, or to opt-in to in-person if the space exists. This division is on a child-by-child basis, meaning that a family can have one child doing entirely virtual learning while another goes to school in-person. Again, families will indicate need for transportation on their survey, and MCPS hopes to meet the demand accordingly, employing a model for transit in which one student can sit in each seat on the bus and therefore they can run at approximately 50% capacity. In schools themselves, students and staff will wear facemasks (which will be provided if students do not already have them), hand sanitizer will be prevalent, and new air filters are being installed to comply with CDC guidelines. Schools are putting up posters and floor decals reminding students of COVID physical distancing requirements, and parents will regularly fill out health symptom screening forms for their children (though as at-large Board Member Brenda Wolff noted, there is a concern about parents being willing to lie on these forms in order to get their children out of the house). Schools will carefully monitor any croppings-up of COVID cases, and one positive case will not necessarily require a school to shut down.

Ultimately, there are many unknowns that remain about this system. We don’t know what the health situation will look like in a couple of months, but unless the guidelines change MCPS is currently nowhere near prepared for a safe re-opening. Additionally, we don’t know what the results of the parent survey will hold, especially as many parents find themselves caught in a conundrum.

They want to know what in-person learning will look like before saying whether they want their children to participate, and MCPS won’t develop specific plans without information from the parents on what their children will need.

When they do have this information, it will vary in its application among the different parts of the county, according to the needs of communities and resources of the schools. Ultimately the plan for reopening that was presented today has worked out to be little more than an outline for what someday could be a plan, with zero specifics given and little change from the model MCPS was developing for a first semester reopening over the summer. In fact, the only major substantial changes appear to have been a lessening of specificity in our eventual model, at least until the results from the parent survey come back.

MCPS is seeking feedback on their virtual model. If you are interested in submitting your opinions, go to: mcpssubmitfeedback.org.

For more information on the plan for reopening, go to: 

https://go.boarddocs.com/mabe/mcpsmd/Board.nsf/files/BV4U397A0D29/$file/Opening%20Schs%20Recovery%20Ed%20201106%20PPT.pdf